The more I learn about quantum mechanics and field theory, the more I truly believe we are in a simulation, existing within a computer program. The particles we see when we make the observation are essentially a bit of information, and the field is all the possibilities that the program is capable of displaying. But the sad part is there may be no way to ever prove this.
If we are capable of creating our own simulation, there is a high probability that we are a simulation because it is more probable for a Boltzman brain to assemble from quantum foam than intelligence to develop from evolution. 😁😁😁😁
This has a bearing on human free will. If the position and momentum of the electrons in your brain are unpredictable, then you are not predestined to do anything. Your future actions are random, but that does not mean you have free will. Your future actions are unpredictable, even to you.
This video is nonsense. Einstein contributed more to quantum theory than any other physicist in history. Einstein didn't just write the photoelectric paper, he quantized the radiation field. He then followed that up with his seminal paper on the Specific Heat of Solids. He then followed that up with another seminal paper on Phonons. He then followed that up with a revolutionary paper on Wave-Particle Duality. De Broglie almost literally copied Einsteins equation, applied it to electrons, and won his Nobel Prize on matter waves (which he would never have been able to do without Einsteins paper). Einstein, using ingenuous statistical arguments, did this 13 years BEFORE De Broglie did. Bohrs work on electron orbits (discontinuous transitions) was also a direct byproduct of Einstein's work from 1905 to 1910. Einsteins work on Spontaneous and Stimulated Emission, as codified in the Nobel-Prize worthy Einstein A and B Coefficients, created the foundation for the LASER. Einsteins work on Bose-Einstein Statistics and Bose-Einstein Condensates, in which Einstein, and Einstein ALONE, predicted the Boson (which, due to historical reasons was incorrectly named) which created Condesed Matter physics - an entirely new state of matter. Without this work of Einstein's, superconductivity would be impossible. Without Einstein's work in this area, Schrodinger likely never derives the proper equation for the wave function as he always acknowledged. It was Einstein who first conceived of what would essentially later become the Born Rule, according to Max Born himself, by interpreting the "square of the optical wave amplitudes as probability density for the occurence of photons." Max Born took Einsteins work - which Einstein had applied to a gas of photons - and simply applied it to a gas of electrons. And then won a Nobel Prize for it (Born, much like Schrodinger, was effusive in his praise for Einstein). Einstein was the first to discover Entanglement, something that Bohr, Dirac, Heisenberg and Schrodinger etc all missed. Einsteins seminal EPR Paradox paper laid the foundation for quantum information theory as Clauser, Aspect, and others have widely acknowledged. There is no quantum mechanics without Einstein as T. S. Kuhn, Stachel, Stone, Brown, and many other physicists and historians of physics have acknowledged. For Dan Hopper to imply that Einstein's dislike of Quantum Mechanics meant that he didn't contribute to it other than being a critic of it is not just patently false but the shows a distinct lack of intellectual honesty. Did Einstein dislike certain elements of quantum theory, yes. Did he criticize it frequently, yes. But he also contributed most of the original concepts that would make it's way into the theory (including the aforementioned wave-particle duality, B-E Condensates, Intrinsic randomness, and Entanglement, to name only some). Einsteins big issue with quantum mechanics was not that it was probabilistic - after all his 1916-1919 papers on Spontaneous Emission introduced intrinsic randomness into quantum theory - but that Bohr insisted on the idea that the "observer" directly influenced measurements and experiments. That felt like, cheap superstitious reasoning to Einstein as Wolfgang Pauli pointed out in a letter to Max Born Poor video. I recommend to anybody interested in learning about Einstein's IMMENSE contributions to Quantum mechanics to read two books starting with: 1. Einstein and the Quantum: The Quest of the Valiant Swabian by Douglas Stone And 2. My God, He plays Dice!: How Albert Einstein Invented Most of Quantum Physics by Bob Doyle To quote Sean Carroll "If anything, Einstein is underrated; he understood quantum mechanics better than anybody ever has."
And, if that is the case, what happens if you tell that person what he will do next year? Is telling him what causes that to happen? Or did you just change the outcome?
Could we be the dice players? This is an invitation to see a theory where light is both a wave and a particle, with a probabilistic future (∆×∆pᵪ≥h/4π), continuously unfolding in relation to the electron probability cloud of atoms and the wavelength of light. According to this theory, the wave-particle duality of light and matter (electrons) creates a blank canvas that we can interact with forming a future relative to the energy and momentum of our actions. This interaction is represented by a constant of action in space and time, mathematically denoted as the Planck constant h/2π. This concept is supported by the continuous exchange of light photon energy (∆E=hf) into the kinetic energy (Eₖ=½mv²) of matter, in the form of electrons.
This video is nonsense. Einstein contributed more to quantum theory than any other physicist in history. Einstein didn't just write the photoelectric paper, he quantized the radiation field. He then followed that up with his seminal paper on the Specific Heat of Solids. He then followed that up with another seminal paper on Phonons. He then followed that up with a revolutionary paper on Wave-Particle Duality. De Broglie almost literally copied Einsteins equation, applied it to electrons, and won his Nobel Prize on matter waves (which he would never have been able to do without Einsteins paper). Einstein, using ingenuous statistical arguments, did this 13 years BEFORE De Broglie did. Bohrs work on electron orbits (discontinuous transitions) was also a direct byproduct of Einstein's work from 1905 to 1910. Einsteins work on Spontaneous and Stimulated Emission, as codified in the Nobel-Prize worthy Einstein A and B Coefficients, created the foundation for the LASER. Einsteins work on Bose-Einstein Statistics and Bose-Einstein Condensates, in which Einstein, and Einstein ALONE, predicted the Boson (which, due to historical reasons was incorrectly named) which created Condesed Matter physics - an entirely new state of matter. Without this work of Einstein's, superconductivity would be impossible. Without Einstein's work in this area, Schrodinger likely never derives the proper equation for the wave function as he always acknowledged. It was Einstein who first conceived of what would essentially later become the Born Rule, according to Max Born himself, by interpreting the "square of the optical wave amplitudes as probability density for the occurence of photons." Max Born took Einsteins work - which Einstein had applied to a gas of photons - and simply applied it to a gas of electrons. And then won a Nobel Prize for it (Born, much like Schrodinger, was effusive in his praise for Einstein). Einstein was the first to discover Entanglement, something that Bohr, Dirac, Heisenberg and Schrodinger etc all missed. Einsteins seminal EPR Paradox paper laid the foundation for quantum information theory as Clauser, Aspect, and others have widely acknowledged. There is no quantum mechanics without Einstein as T. S. Kuhn, Stachel, Stone, Brown, and many other physicists and historians of physics have acknowledged. For Dan Hopper to imply that Einstein's dislike of Quantum Mechanics meant that he didn't contribute to it other than being a critic of it is not just patently false but the shows a distinct lack of intellectual honesty. Did Einstein dislike certain elements of quantum theory, yes. Did he criticize it frequently, yes. But he also contributed most of the original concepts that would make it's way into the theory (including the aforementioned wave-particle duality, B-E Condensates, Intrinsic randomness, and Entanglement, to name only some). Einsteins big issue with quantum mechanics was not that it was probabilistic - after all his 1916-1919 papers on Spontaneous Emission introduced intrinsic randomness into quantum theory - but that Bohr insisted on the idea that the "observer" directly influenced measurements and experiments. That felt like, cheap superstitious reasoning to Einstein as Wolfgang Pauli pointed out in a letter to Max Born Poor video. I recommend to anybody interested in learning about Einstein's IMMENSE contributions to Quantum mechanics to read two books starting with: 1. Einstein and the Quantum: The Quest of the Valiant Swabian by Douglas Stone And 2. My God, He plays Dice!: How Albert Einstein Invented Most of Quantum Physics by Bob Doyle To quote Sean Carroll "If anything, Einstein is underrated; he understood quantum mechanics better than anybody ever has."
This video is nonsense. This is why you hire a Historian OF Physics (or a historian of science), and not an actual physicist, to talk about the history of physics. Dan Hopper is an excellent physicist but poor historian of physics. There are many errors with this lecture. Einstein contributed more to quantum theory than any other physicist in history. Einstein didn't just write the photoelectric paper, he quantized the radiation field. He then followed that up with his seminal paper on the Specific Heat of Solids. He then followed that up with another seminal paper on Phonons. He then followed that up with a revolutionary paper on Wave-Particle Duality. De Broglie almost literally copied Einsteins equation, applied it to electrons, and won his Nobel Prize on matter waves (which he would never have been able to do without Einsteins paper). Einstein, using ingenuous statistical arguments, did this 13 years BEFORE De Broglie did. Bohrs work on electron orbits (discontinuous transitions) was also a direct byproduct of Einstein's work from 1905 to 1910. Einsteins work on Spontaneous and Stimulated Emission, as codified in the Nobel-Prize worthy Einstein A and B Coefficients, created the foundation for the LASER. Einsteins work on Bose-Einstein Statistics and Bose-Einstein Condensates, in which Einstein, and Einstein ALONE, predicted the Boson (which, due to historical reasons was incorrectly named) which created Condesed Matter physics - an entirely new state of matter. Without this work of Einstein's, superconductivity would be impossible. Without Einstein's work in this area, Schrodinger likely never derives the proper equation for the wave function as he always acknowledged. It was Einstein who first conceived of what would essentially later become the Born Rule, according to Max Born himself, by interpreting the "square of the optical wave amplitudes as probability density for the occurence of photons." Max Born took Einsteins work - which Einstein had applied to a gas of photons - and simply applied it to a gas of electrons. And then won a Nobel Prize for it (Born, much like Schrodinger, was effusive in his praise for Einstein). Einstein was the first to discover Entanglement, something that Bohr, Dirac, Heisenberg and Schrodinger etc all missed. Einsteins seminal EPR Paradox paper laid the foundation for quantum information theory as Clauser, Aspect, and others have widely acknowledged. There is no quantum mechanics without Einstein as T. S. Kuhn, Stachel, Stone, Brown, and many other physicists and historians of physics have acknowledged. For Dan Hopper to imply that Einstein's dislike of Quantum Mechanics meant that he didn't contribute to it other than being a critic of it is not just patently false but the shows a distinct lack of intellectual honesty. Did Einstein dislike certain elements of quantum theory, yes. Did he criticize it frequently, yes. But he also contributed most of the original concepts that would make it's way into the theory (including the aforementioned wave-particle duality, B-E Condensates, Intrinsic randomness, and Entanglement, to name only some). Einsteins big issue with quantum mechanics was not that it was probabilistic - after all his 1916-1919 papers on Spontaneous Emission introduced intrinsic randomness into quantum theory - but that Bohr insisted on the idea that the "observer" directly influenced measurements and experiments. That felt like, cheap superstitious reasoning to Einstein as Wolfgang Pauli pointed out in a letter to Max Born Poor video. I recommend to anybody interested in learning about Einstein's IMMENSE contributions to Quantum mechanics to read two books starting with: 1. Einstein and the Quantum: The Quest of the Valiant Swabian by Douglas Stone And 2. My God, He plays Dice!: How Albert Einstein Invented Most of Quantum Physics by Bob Doyle To quote a peer of Dan Hopper, Cal Tech physicist Sean Carroll: "If anything, Einstein is underrated; he understood quantum mechanics better than anybody ever has."
This video is nonsense. This is why you hire a Historian OF Physics (or a historian of science), and not an actual physicist, to talk about the history of physics. Dan Hopper is an excellent physicist but poor historian of physics. There are many errors with this lecture. Einstein contributed more to quantum theory than any other physicist in history. Einstein didn't just write the photoelectric paper, he quantized the radiation field. He then followed that up with his seminal paper on the Specific Heat of Solids. He then followed that up with another seminal paper on Phonons. He then followed that up with a revolutionary paper on Wave-Particle Duality. De Broglie almost literally copied Einsteins equation, applied it to electrons, and won his Nobel Prize on matter waves (which he would never have been able to do without Einsteins paper). Einstein, using ingenuous statistical arguments, did this 13 years BEFORE De Broglie did. Bohrs work on electron orbits (discontinuous transitions) was also a direct byproduct of Einstein's work from 1905 to 1910. Einsteins work on Spontaneous and Stimulated Emission, as codified in the Nobel-Prize worthy Einstein A and B Coefficients, created the foundation for the LASER. Einsteins work on Bose-Einstein Statistics and Bose-Einstein Condensates, in which Einstein, and Einstein ALONE, predicted the Boson (which, due to historical reasons was incorrectly named) which created Condesed Matter physics - an entirely new state of matter. Without this work of Einstein's, superconductivity would be impossible. Without Einstein's work in this area, Schrodinger likely never derives the proper equation for the wave function as he always acknowledged. It was Einstein who first conceived of what would essentially later become the Born Rule, according to Max Born himself, by interpreting the "square of the optical wave amplitudes as probability density for the occurence of photons." Max Born took Einsteins work - which Einstein had applied to a gas of photons - and simply applied it to a gas of electrons. And then won a Nobel Prize for it (Born, much like Schrodinger, was effusive in his praise for Einstein). Einstein was the first to discover Entanglement, something that Bohr, Dirac, Heisenberg and Schrodinger etc all missed. Einsteins seminal EPR Paradox paper laid the foundation for quantum information theory as Clauser, Aspect, and others have widely acknowledged. There is no quantum mechanics without Einstein as T. S. Kuhn, Stachel, Stone, Brown, and many other physicists and historians of physics have acknowledged. For Dan Hopper to imply that Einstein's dislike of Quantum Mechanics meant that he didn't contribute to it other than being a critic of it is not just patently false but the shows a distinct lack of intellectual honesty. Did Einstein dislike certain elements of quantum theory, yes. Did he criticize it frequently, yes. But he also contributed most of the original concepts that would make it's way into the theory (including the aforementioned wave-particle duality, B-E Condensates, Intrinsic randomness, and Entanglement, to name only some). Einsteins big issue with quantum mechanics was not that it was probabilistic - after all his 1916-1919 papers on Spontaneous Emission introduced intrinsic randomness into quantum theory - but that Bohr insisted on the idea that the "observer" directly influenced measurements and experiments. That felt like, cheap superstitious reasoning to Einstein as Wolfgang Pauli pointed out in a letter to Max Born Poor video. I recommend to anybody interested in learning about Einstein's IMMENSE contributions to Quantum mechanics to read two books starting with: 1. Einstein and the Quantum: The Quest of the Valiant Swabian by Douglas Stone And 2. My God, He plays Dice!: How Albert Einstein Invented Most of Quantum Physics by Bob Doyle To quote a peer of Dan Hopper, Cal Tech physicist Sean Carroll: "If anything, Einstein is underrated; he understood quantum mechanics better than anybody ever has."
This video is nonsense. This is why you hire a Historian OF Physics (or a historian of science), and not an actual physicist, to talk about the history of physics. Dan Hopper is an excellent physicist but poor historian of physics. There are many errors with this lecture. Einstein contributed more to quantum theory than any other physicist in history. Einstein didn't just write the photoelectric paper, he quantized the radiation field. He then followed that up with his seminal paper on the Specific Heat of Solids. He then followed that up with another seminal paper on Phonons. He then followed that up with a revolutionary paper on Wave-Particle Duality. De Broglie almost literally copied Einsteins equation, applied it to electrons, and won his Nobel Prize on matter waves (which he would never have been able to do without Einsteins paper). Einstein, using ingenuous statistical arguments, did this 13 years BEFORE De Broglie did. Bohrs work on electron orbits (discontinuous transitions) was also a direct byproduct of Einstein's work from 1905 to 1910. Einsteins work on Spontaneous and Stimulated Emission, as codified in the Nobel-Prize worthy Einstein A and B Coefficients, created the foundation for the LASER. Einsteins work on Bose-Einstein Statistics and Bose-Einstein Condensates, in which Einstein, and Einstein ALONE, predicted the Boson (which, due to historical reasons was incorrectly named) which created Condesed Matter physics - an entirely new state of matter. Without this work of Einstein's, superconductivity would be impossible. Without Einstein's work in this area, Schrodinger likely never derives the proper equation for the wave function as he always acknowledged. It was Einstein who first conceived of what would essentially later become the Born Rule, according to Max Born himself, by interpreting the "square of the optical wave amplitudes as probability density for the occurence of photons." Max Born took Einsteins work - which Einstein had applied to a gas of photons - and simply applied it to a gas of electrons. And then won a Nobel Prize for it (Born, much like Schrodinger, was effusive in his praise for Einstein). Einstein was the first to discover Entanglement, something that Bohr, Dirac, Heisenberg and Schrodinger etc all missed. Einsteins seminal EPR Paradox paper laid the foundation for quantum information theory as Clauser, Aspect, and others have widely acknowledged. There is no quantum mechanics without Einstein as T. S. Kuhn, Stachel, Stone, Brown, and many other physicists and historians of physics have acknowledged. For Dan Hopper to imply that Einstein's dislike of Quantum Mechanics meant that he didn't contribute to it other than being a critic of it is not just patently false but the shows a distinct lack of intellectual honesty. Did Einstein dislike certain elements of quantum theory, yes. Did he criticize it frequently, yes. But he also contributed most of the original concepts that would make it's way into the theory (including the aforementioned wave-particle duality, B-E Condensates, Intrinsic randomness, and Entanglement, to name only some). Einsteins big issue with quantum mechanics was not that it was probabilistic - after all his 1916-1919 papers on Spontaneous Emission introduced intrinsic randomness into quantum theory - but that Bohr insisted on the idea that the "observer" directly influenced measurements and experiments. That felt like, cheap superstitious reasoning to Einstein as Wolfgang Pauli pointed out in a letter to Max Born Poor video. I recommend to anybody interested in learning about Einstein's IMMENSE contributions to Quantum mechanics to read two books starting with: 1. Einstein and the Quantum: The Quest of the Valiant Swabian by Douglas Stone And 2. My God, He plays Dice!: How Albert Einstein Invented Most of Quantum Physics by Bob Doyle To quote a peer of Dan Hopper, Cal Tech physicist Sean Carroll: "If anything, Einstein is underrated; he understood quantum mechanics better than anybody ever has."
So what if Einstein was not talking about the god of the bible or of any other religion? Whose says you need a specific religion to address God? Einstein used the term God so obviously he meant God. "God does not play dice with the universe". That's quite a definitive statement if you ask me. So the question is... We understand that an atheist denies God for himself... But why must an atheist deny God for another? Especially if that other one (Einstein in this case) is very clear about what he's saying.
This video is nonsense. Einstein contributed more to quantum theory than any other physicist in history. Einstein didn't just write the photoelectric paper, he quantized the radiation field. He then followed that up with his seminal paper on the Specific Heat of Solids. He then followed that up with another seminal paper on Phonons. He then followed that up with a revolutionary paper on Wave-Particle Duality. De Broglie almost literally copied Einsteins equation, applied it to electrons, and won his Nobel Prize on matter waves (which he would never have been able to do without Einsteins paper). Einstein, using ingenuous statistical arguments, did this 13 years BEFORE De Broglie did. Bohrs work on electron orbits (discontinuous transitions) was also a direct byproduct of Einstein's work from 1905 to 1910. Einsteins work on Spontaneous and Stimulated Emission, as codified in the Nobel-Prize worthy Einstein A and B Coefficients, created the foundation for the LASER. Einsteins work on Bose-Einstein Statistics and Bose-Einstein Condensates, in which Einstein, and Einstein ALONE, predicted the Boson (which, due to historical reasons was incorrectly named) which created Condesed Matter physics - an entirely new state of matter. Without this work of Einstein's, superconductivity would be impossible. Without Einstein's work in this area, Schrodinger likely never derives the proper equation for the wave function as he always acknowledged. It was Einstein who first conceived of what would essentially later become the Born Rule, according to Max Born himself, by interpreting the "square of the optical wave amplitudes as probability density for the occurence of photons." Max Born took Einsteins work - which Einstein had applied to a gas of photons - and simply applied it to a gas of electrons. And then won a Nobel Prize for it (Born, much like Schrodinger, was effusive in his praise for Einstein). Einstein was the first to discover Entanglement, something that Bohr, Dirac, Heisenberg and Schrodinger etc all missed. Einsteins seminal EPR Paradox paper laid the foundation for quantum information theory as Clauser, Aspect, and others have widely acknowledged. There is no quantum mechanics without Einstein as T. S. Kuhn, Stachel, Stone, Brown, and many other physicists and historians of physics have acknowledged. For Dan Hopper to imply that Einstein's dislike of Quantum Mechanics meant that he didn't contribute to it other than being a critic of it is not just patently false but the shows a distinct lack of intellectual honesty. Did Einstein dislike certain elements of quantum theory, yes. Did he criticize it frequently, yes. But he also contributed most of the original concepts that would make it's way into the theory (including the aforementioned wave-particle duality, B-E Condensates, Intrinsic randomness, and Entanglement, to name only some). Einsteins big issue with quantum mechanics was not that it was probabilistic - after all his 1916-1919 papers on Spontaneous Emission introduced intrinsic randomness into quantum theory - but that Bohr insisted on the idea that the "observer" directly influenced measurements and experiments. That felt like, cheap superstitious reasoning to Einstein as Wolfgang Pauli pointed out in a letter to Max Born Poor video. I recommend to anybody interested in learning about Einstein's IMMENSE contributions to Quantum mechanics to read two books starting with: 1. Einstein and the Quantum: The Quest of the Valiant Swabian by Douglas Stone And 2. My God, He plays Dice!: How Albert Einstein Invented Most of Quantum Physics by Bob Doyle To quote Sean Carroll "If anything, Einstein is underrated; he understood quantum mechanics better than anybody ever has."
Most reputable physicists do not like many worlds the best. I think you just like many worlds the best. There are many debates on this stuff from reputable physicist, and after the debate they take votes. Unfortunately the Copenhagen interpretation is still most popular as far as I know. But even then it’s like 30 percent of PhD physicists. Many worlds comes in second. Even if it’s changed since I last checked and many worlds is the most popular, it’s still only gonna be a 30 or 40 percent consensus. So you cannot go around saying most “reputable” physicists like many worlds the best. There is one particularly nice talk on UA-cam where four physicists put fourth their argument for 4 separate interpretations. Brian green hosts it. Sean Carroll argues for many worlds, which is whom I suspect you listen to a lot. Sean is great, but he loves him some many worlds
This video is nonsense. This is why you hire a Historian OF Physics (or a historian of science), and not an actual physicist, to talk about the history of physics. Dan Hopper is an excellent physicist but poor historian of physics. There are many errors with this lecture. Einstein contributed more to quantum theory than any other physicist in history. Einstein didn't just write the photoelectric paper, he quantized the radiation field. He then followed that up with his seminal paper on the Specific Heat of Solids. He then followed that up with another seminal paper on Phonons. He then followed that up with a revolutionary paper on Wave-Particle Duality. De Broglie almost literally copied Einsteins equation, applied it to electrons, and won his Nobel Prize on matter waves (which he would never have been able to do without Einsteins paper). Einstein, using ingenuous statistical arguments, did this 13 years BEFORE De Broglie did. Bohrs work on electron orbits (discontinuous transitions) was also a direct byproduct of Einstein's work from 1905 to 1910. Einsteins work on Spontaneous and Stimulated Emission, as codified in the Nobel-Prize worthy Einstein A and B Coefficients, created the foundation for the LASER. Einsteins work on Bose-Einstein Statistics and Bose-Einstein Condensates, in which Einstein, and Einstein ALONE, predicted the Boson (which, due to historical reasons was incorrectly named) which created Condesed Matter physics - an entirely new state of matter. Without this work of Einstein's, superconductivity would be impossible. Without Einstein's work in this area, Schrodinger likely never derives the proper equation for the wave function as he always acknowledged. It was Einstein who first conceived of what would essentially later become the Born Rule, according to Max Born himself, by interpreting the "square of the optical wave amplitudes as probability density for the occurence of photons." Max Born took Einsteins work - which Einstein had applied to a gas of photons - and simply applied it to a gas of electrons. And then won a Nobel Prize for it (Born, much like Schrodinger, was effusive in his praise for Einstein). Einstein was the first to discover Entanglement, something that Bohr, Dirac, Heisenberg and Schrodinger etc all missed. Einsteins seminal EPR Paradox paper laid the foundation for quantum information theory as Clauser, Aspect, and others have widely acknowledged. There is no quantum mechanics without Einstein as T. S. Kuhn, Stachel, Stone, Brown, and many other physicists and historians of physics have acknowledged. For Dan Hopper to imply that Einstein's dislike of Quantum Mechanics meant that he didn't contribute to it other than being a critic of it is not just patently false but the shows a distinct lack of intellectual honesty. Did Einstein dislike certain elements of quantum theory, yes. Did he criticize it frequently, yes. But he also contributed most of the original concepts that would make it's way into the theory (including the aforementioned wave-particle duality, B-E Condensates, Intrinsic randomness, and Entanglement, to name only some). Einsteins big issue with quantum mechanics was not that it was probabilistic - after all his 1916-1919 papers on Spontaneous Emission introduced intrinsic randomness into quantum theory - but that Bohr insisted on the idea that the "observer" directly influenced measurements and experiments. That felt like, cheap superstitious reasoning to Einstein as Wolfgang Pauli pointed out in a letter to Max Born Poor video. I recommend to anybody interested in learning about Einstein's IMMENSE contributions to Quantum mechanics to read two books starting with: 1. Einstein and the Quantum: The Quest of the Valiant Swabian by Douglas Stone And 2. My God, He plays Dice!: How Albert Einstein Invented Most of Quantum Physics by Bob Doyle To quote a peer of Dan Hopper, Cal Tech physicist Sean Carroll: "If anything, Einstein is underrated; he understood quantum mechanics better than anybody ever has."
@@johndoe-sh6bi Copenhagen interpretation of QM is rubbish. It basically says QM is FUNDAMENTALY irreducible. That is patent nonsense as MOST philosophers of physics have acknowledged .
@@richardromero6193 I dont think there's a consensus to be honest. When I was in grad school, my advisor was a Bohmian. There really is no real consensus about the correct interpretation of QM. And, in fact, thank to Einsteins persistence on pointing Entanglement in his seminal EPR Correlations paper, Quantum Information Theory HAS to parse out what entanglement really is in order to make substantive progress in the field. QM is clearly not the last word on the matter.
To what extent was Einstein aware of and familiar with Henri Poincaré's work which laid the foundations for Chaos Theory? Also, what was his understanding of the problem of knowing the instantaneous (or initial) phase of the wave function? Even a simple precision sinusoid is unpredictable if the initial (or instantaneous) phase is not known in advance.
But don't you think the wave function is spinning, as well? ... In fact, it definitely has to, right? And if it is indeed more like a particle and hardly acts like a wave then how do you explain red-shift and blue-shift phenomenon of observation of distant Galaxys, or rather the color spectrum Doppler effect? Because in that specific instance it does behave more like a 2-dimensional wave and less like a 3-dimensional particle, or 2-dimensional spin/spinning wave. I'm having a little hard time understanding that such a tiny photon can be wave-compressed or stretched, especially with the 1st example at the very beginning. Well, I wouldn't say that a photon could be in all places at the same time but rather it's energy until it is measured and collapsed to a certain degree probable area location. And I wonder if you can influence a photon to be found in location 'A' rather than 'B'? I do however, believe in God, and maybe this is his way to keep us busy.
Not bad but still only a classical overview of the history of QM; the main fault is not mentioning the cause for De Broglie's "material" wave interpretation and the plenty of paradoxes arising from it like the "moving" "particle" would have higher energy and then higher frequency (E=hf) but according to Relativity Theory, the effect is the opposite: f'=f(1- (v/c)^2)^ (-1/2)- the consequence of Lorentz formula for the light's source. At the background is a typical physicist's lack of knowledge of the. methodology of his own subject matter (in general: philosophy of science, esp. not distinguishing between a (mathematical)model and the (laboratory) data,here, esp. forgetting that Jacobi-Hamilton mathematical models of "wave" and a "particle" was not a physical "things" but just a model to explain other data of experiments (available only later). Consequently, talking about the wave of a ball or any tiny rigid body (being) is a total para science that forgets that QM is a statistical theory and does not deal with an "object"! More; any statistical (or probability law) is the same deterministic as any classical physics laws but it only deals with the sets of objects. Nothing mysterious here. The name Heisenberg's Uncertainty is a deception and a thought experiment for Heisenberg's microscope is misleading as treating an "electron" as traveling and consequently it suggest His) momentum is a function of speed but that is not the case if the datum is treated as the interaction of a measuring device with a field(wave) that does not move but is standing (on the definition)
I can relate to Einstein's blockage. I have a fundamental, seemingly in built rejection of the theories of probability and statistics. This was a dead end for a career in the biological science of ecology.. Unless one can bypass such a feeling, or lie and build upon that lie, it is a career dead end in many ways.
This video is nonsense. Einstein contributed more to quantum theory than any other physicist in history. Einstein didn't just write the photoelectric paper, he quantized the radiation field. He then followed that up with his seminal paper on the Specific Heat of Solids. He then followed that up with another seminal paper on Phonons. He then followed that up with a revolutionary paper on Wave-Particle Duality. De Broglie almost literally copied Einsteins equation, applied it to electrons, and won his Nobel Prize on matter waves (which he would never have been able to do without Einsteins paper). Einstein, using ingenuous statistical arguments, did this 13 years BEFORE De Broglie did. Bohrs work on electron orbits (discontinuous transitions) was also a direct byproduct of Einstein's work from 1905 to 1910. Einsteins work on Spontaneous and Stimulated Emission, as codified in the Nobel-Prize worthy Einstein A and B Coefficients, created the foundation for the LASER. Einsteins work on Bose-Einstein Statistics and Bose-Einstein Condensates, in which Einstein, and Einstein ALONE, predicted the Boson (which, due to historical reasons was incorrectly named) which created Condesed Matter physics - an entirely new state of matter. Without this work of Einstein's, superconductivity would be impossible. Without Einstein's work in this area, Schrodinger likely never derives the proper equation for the wave function as he always acknowledged. It was Einstein who first conceived of what would essentially later become the Born Rule, according to Max Born himself, by interpreting the "square of the optical wave amplitudes as probability density for the occurence of photons." Max Born took Einsteins work - which Einstein had applied to a gas of photons - and simply applied it to a gas of electrons. And then won a Nobel Prize for it (Born, much like Schrodinger, was effusive in his praise for Einstein). Einstein was the first to discover Entanglement, something that Bohr, Dirac, Heisenberg and Schrodinger etc all missed. Einsteins seminal EPR Paradox paper laid the foundation for quantum information theory as Clauser, Aspect, and others have widely acknowledged. There is no quantum mechanics without Einstein as T. S. Kuhn, Stachel, Stone, Brown, and many other physicists and historians of physics have acknowledged. For Dan Hopper to imply that Einstein's dislike of Quantum Mechanics meant that he didn't contribute to it other than being a critic of it is not just patently false but the shows a distinct lack of intellectual honesty. Did Einstein dislike certain elements of quantum theory, yes. Did he criticize it frequently, yes. But he also contributed most of the original concepts that would make it's way into the theory (including the aforementioned wave-particle duality, B-E Condensates, Intrinsic randomness, and Entanglement, to name only some). Einsteins big issue with quantum mechanics was not that it was probabilistic - after all his 1916-1919 papers on Spontaneous Emission introduced intrinsic randomness into quantum theory - but that Bohr insisted on the idea that the "observer" directly influenced measurements and experiments. That felt like, cheap superstitious reasoning to Einstein as Wolfgang Pauli pointed out in a letter to Max Born Poor video. I recommend to anybody interested in learning about Einstein's IMMENSE contributions to Quantum mechanics to read two books starting with: 1. Einstein and the Quantum: The Quest of the Valiant Swabian by Douglas Stone And 2. My God, He plays Dice!: How Albert Einstein Invented Most of Quantum Physics by Bob Doyle To quote Sean Carroll "If anything, Einstein is underrated; he understood quantum mechanics better than anybody ever has."
So it works like this. God created the universe, the big bang. You ask: how? This is how. God created what I call the Expanding Graviton. The expanding graviton has 3 main properties. 1) Gravitons are wave functions. Wave functions have quantum states for momentum/position/energy/spin. 2) Expanding gravitons are the carriers of the physics constants. The difference between superstring mathematics and Expanding gravitons is that Expanding gravitons are endowed with physical existence by virtue of being the carriers of the physics constants. 3) Expanding gravitons are called expanding gravitons because they expand at the speed of light with radius r = speed of light * time. This is the foundation of relativity and was inspired by the time dilation derivation of which critics should familiarize themselves with. When wave functions are part of a quantum system, like the hydrogen wave function, it is because the charges have overcome a very tiny, very neglible amount of energy required to capture the expanding graviton, making it a captured graviton. Dark energy is the graviton "capture" energy of all of the gravitons that exist in the universe, today. Gravitons are continually being created (by events?). The inflationary epoch of the big bang can be explained by the creation of gravitons at an accelerated rate, many orders of magnitude higher than normal. The surface area of an expanding graviton is a virtual photon. So, the Creator created the first graviton. Squeezed it down to an energy E = hf = energy of the big bang. This corresponds to a wavelength of about the diameter of a graviton, lambda = c/f. Lambda = Planck constant*speed of light/energy of the big bang. Energy of the big bang is approximately 10^70 joules. So the wavelength is about 10^ -96 meters which is a lot smaller than the Planck scale. Then, God said, Let there be light. Big bang.
If the object is not spherical it will not go round the nucleus is that simple, do not drown your self in the cup of water guys, only time atom is wave, when it wasn't atom at all. like before formations or time of lightening. Atoms just claps from sphere to wave.
Hi Calvin, this video is episode eight from the series "What Einstein Got Wrong", Presented by Dan Hooper. Learn more: www.wondrium.com/what-einstein-got-wrong
This video is nonsense. This is why you hire a Historian OF Physics (or a historian of science), and not an actual physicist, to talk about the history of physics. Dan Hopper is an excellent physicist but poor historian of physics. There are many errors with this lecture. Einstein contributed more to quantum theory than any other physicist in history. Einstein didn't just write the photoelectric paper, he quantized the radiation field. He then followed that up with his seminal paper on the Specific Heat of Solids. He then followed that up with another seminal paper on Phonons. He then followed that up with a revolutionary paper on Wave-Particle Duality. De Broglie almost literally copied Einsteins equation, applied it to electrons, and won his Nobel Prize on matter waves (which he would never have been able to do without Einsteins paper). Einstein, using ingenuous statistical arguments, did this 13 years BEFORE De Broglie did. Bohrs work on electron orbits (discontinuous transitions) was also a direct byproduct of Einstein's work from 1905 to 1910. Einsteins work on Spontaneous and Stimulated Emission, as codified in the Nobel-Prize worthy Einstein A and B Coefficients, created the foundation for the LASER. Einsteins work on Bose-Einstein Statistics and Bose-Einstein Condensates, in which Einstein, and Einstein ALONE, predicted the Boson (which, due to historical reasons was incorrectly named) which created Condesed Matter physics - an entirely new state of matter. Without this work of Einstein's, superconductivity would be impossible. Without Einstein's work in this area, Schrodinger likely never derives the proper equation for the wave function as he always acknowledged. It was Einstein who first conceived of what would essentially later become the Born Rule, according to Max Born himself, by interpreting the "square of the optical wave amplitudes as probability density for the occurence of photons." Max Born took Einsteins work - which Einstein had applied to a gas of photons - and simply applied it to a gas of electrons. And then won a Nobel Prize for it (Born, much like Schrodinger, was effusive in his praise for Einstein). Einstein was the first to discover Entanglement, something that Bohr, Dirac, Heisenberg and Schrodinger etc all missed. Einsteins seminal EPR Paradox paper laid the foundation for quantum information theory as Clauser, Aspect, and others have widely acknowledged. There is no quantum mechanics without Einstein as T. S. Kuhn, Stachel, Stone, Brown, and many other physicists and historians of physics have acknowledged. For Dan Hopper to imply that Einstein's dislike of Quantum Mechanics meant that he didn't contribute to it other than being a critic of it is not just patently false but the shows a distinct lack of intellectual honesty. Did Einstein dislike certain elements of quantum theory, yes. Did he criticize it frequently, yes. But he also contributed most of the original concepts that would make it's way into the theory (including the aforementioned wave-particle duality, B-E Condensates, Intrinsic randomness, and Entanglement, to name only some). Einsteins big issue with quantum mechanics was not that it was probabilistic - after all his 1916-1919 papers on Spontaneous Emission introduced intrinsic randomness into quantum theory - but that Bohr insisted on the idea that the "observer" directly influenced measurements and experiments. That felt like, cheap superstitious reasoning to Einstein as Wolfgang Pauli pointed out in a letter to Max Born Poor video. I recommend to anybody interested in learning about Einstein's IMMENSE contributions to Quantum mechanics to read two books starting with: 1. Einstein and the Quantum: The Quest of the Valiant Swabian by Douglas Stone And 2. My God, He plays Dice!: How Albert Einstein Invented Most of Quantum Physics by Bob Doyle To quote a peer of Dan Hopper, Cal Tech physicist Sean Carroll: "If anything, Einstein is underrated; he understood quantum mechanics better than anybody ever has."
@@TheGreatCourses Would be nice if you guys were as obsessed about the things Einstein got right, which you've omitted (e.g. Bose-Einstein Condensates are pretty damn important to physics, his Spontaneous and Stimulated Emission trilogy of paper is pretty damn important to physics, etc), as you are about the things he "got wrong." Go read Max Born's Nobel lecture and tell me Einstein was "wrong" when he conceived of, and then gift wrapped, the idea that led to Max Born's Nobel Prize. Disappointed. Why aren't you doing an eponymous series on what "Isaac Newton Got Wrong?" (Hint: lots of things). Very disappointed.
Why black whole goes to singularity ? can you expain, any idea about this .i think ...........
Місяць тому
It seems very unlikely that this is so. That its only a probability where a electron happens. I suggest the rerror is in the presumption light is a wave or a particle. instead its a thing that only manifests itself in a wave or particle based on resistence. The darkness being the resister. just as light is resisted by glass or water etc.
What is described here about Einsteins view on Quantum Mechanics are cliches. There is a whole book with the letters exchanged between Einstein and Max Born. Einstein himself explicitly denied believing in a deterministic world view. Einstein was not so much concerned about the probabilistic nature of the Quantum world (though the quote is correct) but about what he called "spooky action at a distance" (spukhafte Fernwirkung in German) and what is now called Non-locality. The first time he brought this up was by a thought experiment at the Solvay conference 1927. It is also a cliche Niels Bohr always found a convincing answer to Einsteins thought experiments. He did sometimes and at other time did not even understand what Einstein aimed at. There is no scientific consensus on the Kopenhagen interpretation, not now and never was and their disciples could never agree between each other what it meant. There is only a Kopenhagen mysticism. Schrödinger like Einstein never agreed to the Kopenhagen views (that is why Schrödinger constructed his famous cat thought experiment) nor did John Bell and many other. For a more balanced view read the Book of Douglas Stone (Physicist professor at Yale university) : Einstein and the Quantum.
This video is nonsense. This is why you hire a Historian OF Physics (or a historian of science), and not an actual physicist, to talk about the history of physics. Dan Hopper is an excellent physicist but poor historian of physics. There are many errors with this lecture. Einstein contributed more to quantum theory than any other physicist in history. Einstein didn't just write the photoelectric paper, he quantized the radiation field. He then followed that up with his seminal paper on the Specific Heat of Solids. He then followed that up with another seminal paper on Phonons. He then followed that up with a revolutionary paper on Wave-Particle Duality. De Broglie almost literally copied Einsteins equation, applied it to electrons, and won his Nobel Prize on matter waves (which he would never have been able to do without Einsteins paper). Einstein, using ingenuous statistical arguments, did this 13 years BEFORE De Broglie did. Bohrs work on electron orbits (discontinuous transitions) was also a direct byproduct of Einstein's work from 1905 to 1910. Einsteins work on Spontaneous and Stimulated Emission, as codified in the Nobel-Prize worthy Einstein A and B Coefficients, created the foundation for the LASER. Einsteins work on Bose-Einstein Statistics and Bose-Einstein Condensates, in which Einstein, and Einstein ALONE, predicted the Boson (which, due to historical reasons was incorrectly named) which created Condesed Matter physics - an entirely new state of matter. Without this work of Einstein's, superconductivity would be impossible. Without Einstein's work in this area, Schrodinger likely never derives the proper equation for the wave function as he always acknowledged. It was Einstein who first conceived of what would essentially later become the Born Rule, according to Max Born himself, by interpreting the "square of the optical wave amplitudes as probability density for the occurence of photons." Max Born took Einsteins work - which Einstein had applied to a gas of photons - and simply applied it to a gas of electrons. And then won a Nobel Prize for it (Born, much like Schrodinger, was effusive in his praise for Einstein). Einstein was the first to discover Entanglement, something that Bohr, Dirac, Heisenberg and Schrodinger etc all missed. Einsteins seminal EPR Paradox paper laid the foundation for quantum information theory as Clauser, Aspect, and others have widely acknowledged. There is no quantum mechanics without Einstein as T. S. Kuhn, Stachel, Stone, Brown, and many other physicists and historians of physics have acknowledged. For Dan Hopper to imply that Einstein's dislike of Quantum Mechanics meant that he didn't contribute to it other than being a critic of it is not just patently false but the shows a distinct lack of intellectual honesty. Did Einstein dislike certain elements of quantum theory, yes. Did he criticize it frequently, yes. But he also contributed most of the original concepts that would make it's way into the theory (including the aforementioned wave-particle duality, B-E Condensates, Intrinsic randomness, and Entanglement, to name only some). Einsteins big issue with quantum mechanics was not that it was probabilistic - after all his 1916-1919 papers on Spontaneous Emission introduced intrinsic randomness into quantum theory - but that Bohr insisted on the idea that the "observer" directly influenced measurements and experiments. That felt like, cheap superstitious reasoning to Einstein as Wolfgang Pauli pointed out in a letter to Max Born Poor video. I recommend to anybody interested in learning about Einstein's IMMENSE contributions to Quantum mechanics to read two books starting with: 1. Einstein and the Quantum: The Quest of the Valiant Swabian by Douglas Stone And 2. My God, He plays Dice!: How Albert Einstein Invented Most of Quantum Physics by Bob Doyle To quote a peer of Dan Hopper, Cal Tech physicist Sean Carroll: "If anything, Einstein is underrated; he understood quantum mechanics better than anybody ever has."
But is it possible to have something existing without something creating it? Wouldn't it be more logical if the existence was "eternal"and infinite allowed sentient beeing to emerge and create god to explain what they can't prove or understand? @@bunnypoop4508
This guy is already wrong. Einstein was referencing that there is order to quantum physics hence the quote, "God doesn't play dice with the universe". Einstein already knew there is order in the universe which humans perceive as chaos.
It’s all happened by chance including earth. Billions of years to come up with the right combination. It’s like winning a lottery in the vast universe.
Love this man's lecture. He speaks in a continuous manner. His thoughts are so organized and well thought out. No pauses, back tracking or well-uh or you- know phrases of hesitancy or indecision. I have never heard this kind of presentation before where the speaker is so knowledgeable about the subject matter that he can communicate his thoughts in a continuous flow of complete sentences! I am thoroughly impressed. He must be an incredible teaching professor! I wish I could speak like this, or even better, I wish my thoughts were half as organized as his!
Thank you so much for your kind feedback, Calvin! We truly pride ourselves on our professors and the depth of our content and are very glad you're enjoying our offerings. Thanks for being a fan!
He's a phenomenal physicist and a great teacher of physics. However, this video is partly about the history of physics and in this department he gets a lot wrong. This is why you hire a Historian OF Physics (or a historian of science), and not an actual physicist, to talk about the history of physics. Dan Hopper is an excellent physicist but poor historian of physics. There are many errors with this lecture. Einstein contributed more to quantum theory than any other physicist in history. Einstein didn't just write the photoelectric paper, he quantized the radiation field. He then followed that up with his seminal paper on the Specific Heat of Solids. He then followed that up with another seminal paper on Phonons. He then followed that up with a revolutionary paper on Wave-Particle Duality. De Broglie almost literally copied Einsteins equation, applied it to electrons, and won his Nobel Prize on matter waves (which he would never have been able to do without Einsteins paper). Einstein, using ingenuous statistical arguments, did this 13 years BEFORE De Broglie did. Bohrs work on electron orbits (discontinuous transitions) was also a direct byproduct of Einstein's work from 1905 to 1910. Einsteins work on Spontaneous and Stimulated Emission, as codified in the Nobel-Prize worthy Einstein A and B Coefficients, created the foundation for the LASER. Einsteins work on Bose-Einstein Statistics and Bose-Einstein Condensates, in which Einstein, and Einstein ALONE, predicted the Boson (which, due to historical reasons was incorrectly named) which created Condesed Matter physics - an entirely new state of matter. Without this work of Einstein's, superconductivity would be impossible. Without Einstein's work in this area, Schrodinger likely never derives the proper equation for the wave function as he always acknowledged. It was Einstein who first conceived of what would essentially later become the Born Rule, according to Max Born himself, by interpreting the "square of the optical wave amplitudes as probability density for the occurence of photons." Max Born took Einsteins work - which Einstein had applied to a gas of photons - and simply applied it to a gas of electrons. And then won a Nobel Prize for it (Born, much like Schrodinger, was effusive in his praise for Einstein). Einstein was the first to discover Entanglement, something that Bohr, Dirac, Heisenberg and Schrodinger etc all missed. Einsteins seminal EPR Paradox paper laid the foundation for quantum information theory as Clauser, Aspect, and others have widely acknowledged. There is no quantum mechanics without Einstein as T. S. Kuhn, Stachel, Stone, Brown, and many other physicists and historians of physics have acknowledged. For Dan Hopper to imply that Einstein's dislike of Quantum Mechanics meant that he didn't contribute to it other than being a critic of it is not just patently false but the shows a distinct lack of intellectual honesty. Did Einstein dislike certain elements of quantum theory, yes. Did he criticize it frequently, yes. But he also contributed most of the original concepts that would make it's way into the theory (including the aforementioned wave-particle duality, B-E Condensates, Intrinsic randomness, and Entanglement, to name only some). Einsteins big issue with quantum mechanics was not that it was probabilistic - after all his 1916-1919 papers on Spontaneous Emission introduced intrinsic randomness into quantum theory - but that Bohr insisted on the idea that the "observer" directly influenced measurements and experiments. That felt like, cheap superstitious reasoning to Einstein as Wolfgang Pauli pointed out in a letter to Max Born Poor video. I recommend to anybody interested in learning about Einstein's IMMENSE contributions to Quantum mechanics to read two books starting with: 1. Einstein and the Quantum: The Quest of the Valiant Swabian by Douglas Stone And 2. My God, He plays Dice!: How Albert Einstein Invented Most of Quantum Physics by Bob Doyle To quote a peer of Dan Hopper, Cal Tech physicist Sean Carroll: "If anything, Einstein is underrated; he understood quantum mechanics better than anybody ever has."
Has anyone stopped to think that an extruded piece of massless plasma into the eye of an atom, as all nuclear particles must be, can take on a number of behaviour patterns dependant upon the influences upon it. The Four key patterns would be particle form...wave form...cloud form, and invisible, undetectable form, and can change from one to the other in a nanosecond. The key to it all is the higgs-field because this is the imploding force that sucked all this massless material into the atom in the first place...dependant upon the strength of implosion when sucking in each layer of plasma, and which varies between the strong nuclear force to the much reduced weak force. This higgs implosion is a separate universal force than the others because it has a kicking force of 186000 mps left over from the original shockwaves that passed through the universe at the time of its Creation making the higgs-field the true God Particle which can unravel all universal atomic mysteries.
This video is nonsense. This is why you hire a Historian OF Physics (or a historian of science), and not an actual physicist, to talk about the history of physics. Dan Hopper is an excellent physicist but poor historian of physics. There are many errors with this lecture. Einstein contributed more to quantum theory than any other physicist in history. Einstein didn't just write the photoelectric paper, he quantized the radiation field. He then followed that up with his seminal paper on the Specific Heat of Solids. He then followed that up with another seminal paper on Phonons. He then followed that up with a revolutionary paper on Wave-Particle Duality. De Broglie almost literally copied Einsteins equation, applied it to electrons, and won his Nobel Prize on matter waves (which he would never have been able to do without Einsteins paper). Einstein, using ingenuous statistical arguments, did this 13 years BEFORE De Broglie did. Bohrs work on electron orbits (discontinuous transitions) was also a direct byproduct of Einstein's work from 1905 to 1910. Einsteins work on Spontaneous and Stimulated Emission, as codified in the Nobel-Prize worthy Einstein A and B Coefficients, created the foundation for the LASER. Einsteins work on Bose-Einstein Statistics and Bose-Einstein Condensates, in which Einstein, and Einstein ALONE, predicted the Boson (which, due to historical reasons was incorrectly named) which created Condesed Matter physics - an entirely new state of matter. Without this work of Einstein's, superconductivity would be impossible. Without Einstein's work in this area, Schrodinger likely never derives the proper equation for the wave function as he always acknowledged. It was Einstein who first conceived of what would essentially later become the Born Rule, according to Max Born himself, by interpreting the "square of the optical wave amplitudes as probability density for the occurence of photons." Max Born took Einsteins work - which Einstein had applied to a gas of photons - and simply applied it to a gas of electrons. And then won a Nobel Prize for it (Born, much like Schrodinger, was effusive in his praise for Einstein). Einstein was the first to discover Entanglement, something that Bohr, Dirac, Heisenberg and Schrodinger etc all missed. Einsteins seminal EPR Paradox paper laid the foundation for quantum information theory as Clauser, Aspect, and others have widely acknowledged. There is no quantum mechanics without Einstein as T. S. Kuhn, Stachel, Stone, Brown, and many other physicists and historians of physics have acknowledged. For Dan Hopper to imply that Einstein's dislike of Quantum Mechanics meant that he didn't contribute to it other than being a critic of it is not just patently false but the shows a distinct lack of intellectual honesty. Did Einstein dislike certain elements of quantum theory, yes. Did he criticize it frequently, yes. But he also contributed most of the original concepts that would make it's way into the theory (including the aforementioned wave-particle duality, B-E Condensates, Intrinsic randomness, and Entanglement, to name only some). Einsteins big issue with quantum mechanics was not that it was probabilistic - after all his 1916-1919 papers on Spontaneous Emission introduced intrinsic randomness into quantum theory - but that Bohr insisted on the idea that the "observer" directly influenced measurements and experiments. That felt like, cheap superstitious reasoning to Einstein as Wolfgang Pauli pointed out in a letter to Max Born Poor video. I recommend to anybody interested in learning about Einstein's IMMENSE contributions to Quantum mechanics to read two books starting with: 1. Einstein and the Quantum: The Quest of the Valiant Swabian by Douglas Stone And 2. My God, He plays Dice!: How Albert Einstein Invented Most of Quantum Physics by Bob Doyle To quote a peer of Dan Hopper, Cal Tech physicist Sean Carroll: "If anything, Einstein is underrated; he understood quantum mechanics better than anybody ever has."
This video is nonsense. This is why you hire a Historian OF Physics (or a historian of science), and not an actual physicist, to talk about the history of physics. Dan Hopper is an excellent physicist but poor historian of physics. There are many errors with this lecture. Einstein contributed more to quantum theory than any other physicist in history. Einstein didn't just write the photoelectric paper, he quantized the radiation field. He then followed that up with his seminal paper on the Specific Heat of Solids. He then followed that up with another seminal paper on Phonons. He then followed that up with a revolutionary paper on Wave-Particle Duality. De Broglie almost literally copied Einsteins equation, applied it to electrons, and won his Nobel Prize on matter waves (which he would never have been able to do without Einsteins paper). Einstein, using ingenuous statistical arguments, did this 13 years BEFORE De Broglie did. Bohrs work on electron orbits (discontinuous transitions) was also a direct byproduct of Einstein's work from 1905 to 1910. Einsteins work on Spontaneous and Stimulated Emission, as codified in the Nobel-Prize worthy Einstein A and B Coefficients, created the foundation for the LASER. Einsteins work on Bose-Einstein Statistics and Bose-Einstein Condensates, in which Einstein, and Einstein ALONE, predicted the Boson (which, due to historical reasons was incorrectly named) which created Condesed Matter physics - an entirely new state of matter. Without this work of Einstein's, superconductivity would be impossible. Without Einstein's work in this area, Schrodinger likely never derives the proper equation for the wave function as he always acknowledged. It was Einstein who first conceived of what would essentially later become the Born Rule, according to Max Born himself, by interpreting the "square of the optical wave amplitudes as probability density for the occurence of photons." Max Born took Einsteins work - which Einstein had applied to a gas of photons - and simply applied it to a gas of electrons. And then won a Nobel Prize for it (Born, much like Schrodinger, was effusive in his praise for Einstein). Einstein was the first to discover Entanglement, something that Bohr, Dirac, Heisenberg and Schrodinger etc all missed. Einsteins seminal EPR Paradox paper laid the foundation for quantum information theory as Clauser, Aspect, and others have widely acknowledged. There is no quantum mechanics without Einstein as T. S. Kuhn, Stachel, Stone, Brown, and many other physicists and historians of physics have acknowledged. For Dan Hopper to imply that Einstein's dislike of Quantum Mechanics meant that he didn't contribute to it other than being a critic of it is not just patently false but the shows a distinct lack of intellectual honesty. Did Einstein dislike certain elements of quantum theory, yes. Did he criticize it frequently, yes. But he also contributed most of the original concepts that would make it's way into the theory (including the aforementioned wave-particle duality, B-E Condensates, Intrinsic randomness, and Entanglement, to name only some). Einsteins big issue with quantum mechanics was not that it was probabilistic - after all his 1916-1919 papers on Spontaneous Emission introduced intrinsic randomness into quantum theory - but that Bohr insisted on the idea that the "observer" directly influenced measurements and experiments. That felt like, cheap superstitious reasoning to Einstein as Wolfgang Pauli pointed out in a letter to Max Born Poor video. I recommend to anybody interested in learning about Einstein's IMMENSE contributions to Quantum mechanics to read two books starting with: 1. Einstein and the Quantum: The Quest of the Valiant Swabian by Douglas Stone And 2. My God, He plays Dice!: How Albert Einstein Invented Most of Quantum Physics by Bob Doyle To quote a peer of Dan Hopper, Cal Tech physicist Sean Carroll: "If anything, Einstein is underrated; he understood quantum mechanics better than anybody ever has."
Although I do not have the ability to understand higher mathematics and physics, I believe that God exists, and that God created the universe. I believe that God is also greater than the universe that we are trying to understand with our tools of science and mathematics; Likewise, human beings are greater than a building or car or anything that human beings make. A clay pot is not made by accident. A nicely kept garden or car or building or meal at a restaurant... none of that is done by accident. I think Albert Einstein is correct that God does not play dice. God does not play dice because God CANNOT play dice! When you are the creator of the universe, and greater than all that we try to fathom..., you can not play dice. Likewise, when we see a clay pot or finely designed car or delicious meal,... we know that none of that was done by accident or random roll of dice... To us, we made these things on purpose, for a reason. However, to a tiny ant or fly looking at human beings, maybe they cannot fully fathom what we are doing! To the fly or tiny ant, our actions are like a random, unpredictable series of events! Likewise, as Einstein thought we are like insects stuck in a giant soap bubble, maybe we are looking at God and trying to fathom something well beyond our ability to comprehend, like insects trying to understand human beings.
Proverbs 16:33 tells us that God doesn't play dice and in this verse we can see Matthew 6:33, when we choose to seek first for the kingdom of God and His righteousness the we know that everything doesn't just happen accidently because it's God ordaining us according to His good will for our lives.
God doesn’t play dice with the universe. The universe plays dice with us and sometimes God loads the dice for us. Pretty simple, oh but you probably have the idea of God indoctrinated out of you.
Both Relativity and Quantum Mechanics are fatally flawed. Bohr was right, Einstein liked to think of himself as God. After all, only God could merely imagine a universe and it would miraculously be the one we live in. Especially when we are required to suspend logic from the start, in order to be able to accept the premise. According to Einstein's logic, when you drive your car, you are always traveling at top speed, it is only the number of lines and spaces on the road that are constantly changing and that is what gives us the impression of change in speed. And there is no reason to suggest that the speed of light is any type of constant and/or limit and that time is in anyway variable. As Einstein does. All human experience proves that time is not variable and if they understood light, they would understand why starlight flickers and that the speed of light, affects its frequency and frequency determines speed, of "source light." However, in reflected light, all photons recoil at the same rate, so in reflected light, all frequencies travel at the same speed and it is the distances between photons that changes, to produce what modern science refers to as, polarized light. It is the difference in velocity of photons, of different frequencies, from sources of stellar light, that produces the colored twinkling of pulsars and other intermittent sources, that demonstrate difference in speed, of the various colors of light, when they alternate between red, yellow and blue pulses, which are visible to the naked eye. And Einstein was right about Quantum mechanics and God. Quantum Mechanics is also based on contradictions and that means the theory is false and there is no magic and nothing exists in more than one place at a time. These are counter intuitive, which means, they are illogical. Logic is the only tool we have to understand the physical universe, if we must suspend logic for even an instant, what ever follows becomes a fantasy and a fiction and has no place in the science of Physics. Both sides of this debate use the same language. They both refer to the "wave behavior" of photons and electrons and both Einstein and Quantum Mechanics, not to mention all of science, keeps conflating the physical manifestation of the particles, with their shared "behavior" and implying that they are the same thing. A particle's physical manifestation is the same no matter what its behavior. You are the same person whether you behave like an idiot or not. Double-slit experiments have shown that individual photons do not produce an interference pattern, so they are always "particles", that exhibit wave behavior and there is no contradiction or duality and nothing exists in two different states at the same time....... THERE IS NO MAGIC IN PHYSICS!.... and GOD DOES NOT PLAY DICE! Both Einstein and Quantum Mechanics refuse to accept the fact of the quantum nature of everything. It was his own erroneous theories that confounded Einstein and prevented him from accepting his own theory of quanta. And Quantum Mechanics is contradicting their own theory of individual quanta to suggest that a particle exists everywhere at once. Which demonstrates a complete lack of understanding of subatomic structure. There is only one model of subatomic structure that fits everything: The Halflec Model. A true quantum structure and no magic or doublethink required.
Bohr, according to MOST contemporary physicists, was talking nonsense in the Bohr Einstein debates. Neither of them, strictly speaking, was correct about the final verdict of quantum mechanics but Einstein at least had rational arguments unlike Bohr who constantly retreated into scientific mysticism. This video is nonsense. Einstein contributed more to quantum theory than any other physicist in history. Einstein didn't just write the photoelectric paper, he quantized the radiation field. He then followed that up with his seminal paper on the Specific Heat of Solids. He then followed that up with another seminal paper on Phonons. He then followed that up with a revolutionary paper on Wave-Particle Duality. De Broglie almost literally copied Einsteins equation, applied it to electrons, and won his Nobel Prize on matter waves (which he would never have been able to do without Einsteins paper). Einstein, using ingenuous statistical arguments, did this 13 years BEFORE De Broglie did. Bohrs work on electron orbits (discontinuous transitions) was also a direct byproduct of Einstein's work from 1905 to 1910. Einsteins work on Spontaneous and Stimulated Emission, as codified in the Nobel-Prize worthy Einstein A and B Coefficients, created the foundation for the LASER. Einsteins work on Bose-Einstein Statistics and Bose-Einstein Condensates, in which Einstein, and Einstein ALONE, predicted the Boson (which, due to historical reasons was incorrectly named) which created Condesed Matter physics - an entirely new state of matter. Without this work of Einstein's, superconductivity would be impossible. Without Einstein's work in this area, Schrodinger likely never derives the proper equation for the wave function as he always acknowledged. It was Einstein who first conceived of what would essentially later become the Born Rule, according to Max Born himself, by interpreting the "square of the optical wave amplitudes as probability density for the occurence of photons." Max Born took Einsteins work - which Einstein had applied to a gas of photons - and simply applied it to a gas of electrons. And then won a Nobel Prize for it (Born, much like Schrodinger, was effusive in his praise for Einstein). Einstein was the first to discover Entanglement, something that Bohr, Dirac, Heisenberg and Schrodinger etc all missed. Einsteins seminal EPR Paradox paper laid the foundation for quantum information theory as Clauser, Aspect, and others have widely acknowledged. There is no quantum mechanics without Einstein as T. S. Kuhn, Stachel, Stone, Brown, and many other physicists and historians of physics have acknowledged. For Dan Hopper to imply that Einstein's dislike of Quantum Mechanics meant that he didn't contribute to it other than being a critic of it is not just patently false but the shows a distinct lack of intellectual honesty. Did Einstein dislike certain elements of quantum theory, yes. Did he criticize it frequently, yes. But he also contributed most of the original concepts that would make it's way into the theory (including the aforementioned wave-particle duality, B-E Condensates, Intrinsic randomness, and Entanglement, to name only some). Einsteins big issue with quantum mechanics was not that it was probabilistic - after all his 1916-1919 papers on Spontaneous Emission introduced intrinsic randomness into quantum theory - but that Bohr insisted on the idea that the "observer" directly influenced measurements and experiments. That felt like, cheap superstitious reasoning to Einstein as Wolfgang Pauli pointed out in a letter to Max Born Poor video. I recommend to anybody interested in learning about Einstein's IMMENSE contributions to Quantum mechanics to read two books starting with: 1. Einstein and the Quantum: The Quest of the Valiant Swabian by Douglas Stone And 2. My God, He plays Dice!: How Albert Einstein Invented Most of Quantum Physics by Bob Doyle To quote Sean Carroll "If anything, Einstein is underrated; he understood quantum mechanics better than anybody ever has."
I will just say what I think is happening, and it does indeed involve God playing dice. There are two different ways to travel faster than light, which can as a matter of fact be represented in the Minkowski formalism. In the way which exchanges spacelike and timelike intervals we can have wavelike behaviour with both constructive and destructive interference, and this is what the Schroedinger equation is describing. In the other way which exchanges energy and momentum we have tachyonic Brownian motion which is orthogonal to the first way, complying with the principle that modification of the Schroedinger equation is prohibited. TBM is often almost invisible, but it does come into play when matter interacts with the electromagnetic field in nonlinear fashion, leading to a classically random outcome and no Schroedinger's cat issue. Don't believe me? Well I want to work out how a computer simulation can make use of a random number generator, so alternative suggestions are welcome. Just watch that point about not modifying the Schroedinger equation at the ensemble level.
God isn’t a judgemental figure that controls the universe but yet all is controlled under it and it is the bases of all existence. Matter is always in a changing process, because energy is always in a changing process. Energy moves and transfers the moment intention isn’t given. Movement comes the moment intention is given. Intention is given the moment clinging to matter arises. Everything relies on another thing. One thing relies on another thing to move, to change, just to create or transfer into another thing. Ever-changing constancy comes from ever changing intentions. Thus nothing can settle. Not matter, not thoughts, not energy. The First Law of Thermodynamics (Conservation) states that energy is always conserved, it cannot be created or destroyed. Every piece of existence can only change as it always is, creating and preserving and destroying. Again, this ever changing universe , causing suffering is made by intent. This itself is samsara. creation is creating through the transfer of energy. Creation starts when intent arises, which arises from attachment or grasping. How can attachment or clinging arise? Because of awareness. How can awareness arise? Does it? No. It is unchanging, always still. Everything comes in motion because of awareness. Everything, creation, preserving and destroying is a derivative of being aware. Of settled stillness. Thus movement can arise, thus energy transfers, matter evolves. Everything arises and dissolves back into its origin. Pure nothingness. Mind dissolves after death, physical body decays. Energy stays changing and awareness stays as it is. That which all evolves around and all’s origin. The father of quantum physics, Max Planck, had realised that “consciousness is fundamental; even matter gets derived from consciousness. I regard consciousness as fundamental. I regard matter as derivative from consciousness. We cannot get behind consciousness. Everything that we talk about, everything that we regard as existing, postulates consciousness." Max Planck had also said, "All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force which brings the particle of an atom to vibration and holds this most minute solar system of the atom together. We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent mind. This mind is the matrix of all matter." Why? All starts from awareness witness consciousness. I now separate bodily consciousness and the witness awareness everything evolves around. Why? The witness consciousness (awareness) doesn’t fade even as bodily consciousness fades. Say one hits their head to test how easily consciousness fades. They then say “Consciousness is changing, I feel me becoming more unaware when I hit my head.” To this sentence i propose this statement back. What is aware that awareness of the body and mind is fading? You say “I feel me becoming unconscious” and such. Who is that “I” which is aware thus being spoken outwardly as such? The witness doesn’t fade, everything else does. Even plants are aware , why else does energy constantly change under its movements, and it too changes under energetic movement caused by another force. Because a plant is aware of physical phenomenon, it can grow and change as done. As Max Planck stated, everything is a derivative of this. The Buddha in many lectures to the Buddhist monks , laymen, laywomen, bodhisattvas, etc stressed nothing coming of it’s own origin. Not matter, thoughts, ego, etc. Everything is influenced by others due to intent being made from clinging thus causes creation to arise. It has no origin of its own. As in the shurangama sutra the Buddha personally says everything arises from “Bodhi”. From the self. From awareness - consciousness. Nothing else has it’s one origin or settled being. All situates around beingness. Bodhi. Hum (the one consciousness in which there is the full form of both wisdom and method as one undifferentiable entity/ spirit.) Albert Einstein has to say this. "A human being is a part of the whole, called by us 'Universe,' a part limited in time and space. He experiences himself, his thoughts and feelings as something separate from the rest - a kind of optical delusion of his consciousness. This delusion is a kind of prison for us, restricting us to our personal desires and to affection for a few persons nearest to us. Our task must be to free ourselves from this prison by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature in its beauty. “ As long as action (karma) stays samsara (unsettled movement/ creation, preserving, destruction). As long as that stays, conscious witness awareness can’t be united with. To give up attachment and clinging, intention stops, when intention stops desire is fully dissolved. Thus no more delusions of the mind can be created. Such as false realities of ego, suffering, etc. We must notice physical phenomenon isn’t any different from the witness origin. Study Advaita Vedanta to know what “God” is. But God itself is just an idea. It is the process of clinging onto that which is eternal, awareness, thus a label of empty origin is created. This is an idea of the attaching mind. Science two is just an idea of cleaning onto physical phenomenon which we are aware of. As I said physical existence does not come of its own origin and everything relies on another to create and equal. As I stated before everything is able to be moving and evolving because it all arises from awareness. Without awareness no intentions or no movement can even happen to create universe. As the Buddha had stated all arises from Bodhi. Advaita Vedanta texts are also very good to look into if one is trying to understand eternal reality which all revolves around.
@@willyh.r.1216 no try it out for yourself. you are never not this. is your arm aware of its arm? are your eyes aware of their surroundings? does your touch nerves aware of the touch? no you are not this body. when you are thinking what is aware of your thoughts? you say “I am thinking” , what is aware you are thinking? This is awareness. The witness. Because you are aware of your surroundings you can cling onto it thus thoughts arise due to intention. You do this every moment of your life. Let’s take an example. Because you are aware of the bodily sensation, let’s say you feel the need to urinate, because you’re aware of the body you make the intent to get up and go urinate. Because you are aware of phenomenon intentions arise. When clinging to an intention comes attachment is now established. When attached to physical or mental phenomenon you suffer. When desire/lust/strong wanting stands you suffer. Now to talk about false realities. Things like the ego self. Because you attach to situations that happen because you are aware of it, ideas of the mind arise. you cling to the body thus you see yourself different from others , you believe to be the body - mind , but it all comes back to being aware. you create duality because the mine becomes conditioned when desire stands. You desire something, your mind is conditioned to the environment and others ego selves aswell. The ego itself is thoughts , it is as much as a fairy tale as mythology. It is merely made in the mind. Thus let’s say one wants material items for sense pleasures and ego boost, the moment you desire material items you attach to it. You suffer. You suffer to get it, you suffer if you don’t get it, you suffer when it’s lost, you suffer when someone crumbles your ego and bad talks you. Why? Because you desire for them to see highly of you, to not bad talk you. Why? You attach to ego. Why? You attach to phenomena you are aware of. Why? Because you ability to be aware. You are never not awareness, the mind is the only obstacle that says not so. Matter and other physical phenomenon moves and transfers due to movement, vibration caused by movement. Movement only comes with intent. Whether body or mind. And why is this able to be? Because that is aware. Whether person, animal, plant, etc. any conscious being is aware thus intent and conditioning happens. Without awareness how can one even be able to be conditioned physically or mentally and make intentions to make any matter or energy move and transfer continuously? Without this nothing arises. Not mind or physical movement. This is what the Buddhist labels as Sunyata (emptiness). This is why meditational practice is used in Indic religion. Someone puts off all desire no false realities can arise and even no movement. In samadhi (union with awareness, no intent, deep meditation) even the breath will stop, all bodily function will appear dead, that being has no sense of self, physical or mental, they are just witness consciousness. That which all evolves around. They are “God”. And you are also never not, only mind and clinging causes you to say so. Take Yogananda, Sri Ramakrishna, Ramana Maharshi, and other modern day sages that have shown this type of samadhi documented. This part is skeptical (samadhi) but nevertheless, all revolves around and comes into place , arises , from that which just is, awareness. They hindu calls this “atman”. It is in all but yet the cause of all existence to move, they call that “brahman”. There is no difference. Brahman sustains universally and it’s in you as the “atman”. The Buddhist label “Brahman” as “Dharmakaya”. In you as anatman. (No self). In science, you are aware, even when unconscious as I’ve stated before, you are aware. This awareness isn’t physical. It is aware of physical unconsciousness. Physical things fade. Come into being and disappear. But the witness which is in me, was in dinosaurs millions of years ago. In any animal now, any person. “I am” everywhere. When you sleep you wake and maybe say “I had a deep sleep” “I was sleeping” “I felt myself fall asleep” or if you pass out you may wake and say “I was unconscious” “I could feel it feel like nothing happened, the world felt nonexistent”. You see the “I” doesn’t change and even is aware when your physical consciousness fades. It is the witness. This is “God”. Because of knowing/witness/awareness/Atman, etc is there, everything else haves the ability to arise. Without this everything fades. Like the Christian Bible says “If God were to take back his spirit and withdraw his breath, all life would cease, and humanity would turn again to dust.” If awareness was not, nothing could arise physically or mentally. It would just be as Sunyata. Nothing, like before the Big Bang. Space - time like. Not only do all religions lead to the greatest science but physics and modern science leads to the greatest science. The science of un-physicality. The science of the pure being witness awareness as the base foundation of all. Max Planck had seen this. Albert Einstein. And many more. Quantum mechanics is the study leading to just this. Praise be to these great minds and intellect.
@@eastafrika728 thank you for enlightment, but you know James Brown tune 'this is a man's man's world yes second line but there'd be nothing without a girl or woman but the first verse could' ve been this is a girls or women world but there'd be nothing without a boy or man see what l mean...man rule the world trust me I'm not chavunastic sod.. .
@@eastafrika728 are we here to debate here with the battle of sexes, obviously you're a woman presumed heterosexual, in respect of this agenda you didn't choose your gender, you know there's masculine side as well as feminine, they all claim they're the superior race the irony is any gender whether male or female were they reincarnated don't want to be opposite number, it's a mystery to me unwilling view the world off the flip side... I partly agree with you somehow feminine wiles comes up trump most of the time but its good to chat with you..
@@chapster6273 i mean, rigged for life....death is god throwing the dice again, living is playing, because in the end nobody beats the dice. it's trial and error until they stop hating so much, and no one has to keep dying. so, death is a 14+ billion yrs temporary mesure so far. until life get it right.
Keep in mind that all scientific theories are provisional and falsifiable, and science makes no truth claims or claims about “reality”. Making that connection is scientism, not science.
Excellent point. This video is nonsense. This is why you hire a Historian OF Physics (or a historian of science), and not an actual physicist, to talk about the history of physics. Dan Hopper is an excellent physicist but poor historian of physics. There are many errors with this lecture. Einstein contributed more to quantum theory than any other physicist in history. Einstein didn't just write the photoelectric paper, he quantized the radiation field. He then followed that up with his seminal paper on the Specific Heat of Solids. He then followed that up with another seminal paper on Phonons. He then followed that up with a revolutionary paper on Wave-Particle Duality. De Broglie almost literally copied Einsteins equation, applied it to electrons, and won his Nobel Prize on matter waves (which he would never have been able to do without Einsteins paper). Einstein, using ingenuous statistical arguments, did this 13 years BEFORE De Broglie did. Bohrs work on electron orbits (discontinuous transitions) was also a direct byproduct of Einstein's work from 1905 to 1910. Einsteins work on Spontaneous and Stimulated Emission, as codified in the Nobel-Prize worthy Einstein A and B Coefficients, created the foundation for the LASER. Einsteins work on Bose-Einstein Statistics and Bose-Einstein Condensates, in which Einstein, and Einstein ALONE, predicted the Boson (which, due to historical reasons was incorrectly named) which created Condesed Matter physics - an entirely new state of matter. Without this work of Einstein's, superconductivity would be impossible. Without Einstein's work in this area, Schrodinger likely never derives the proper equation for the wave function as he always acknowledged. It was Einstein who first conceived of what would essentially later become the Born Rule, according to Max Born himself, by interpreting the "square of the optical wave amplitudes as probability density for the occurence of photons." Max Born took Einsteins work - which Einstein had applied to a gas of photons - and simply applied it to a gas of electrons. And then won a Nobel Prize for it (Born, much like Schrodinger, was effusive in his praise for Einstein). Einstein was the first to discover Entanglement, something that Bohr, Dirac, Heisenberg and Schrodinger etc all missed. Einsteins seminal EPR Paradox paper laid the foundation for quantum information theory as Clauser, Aspect, and others have widely acknowledged. There is no quantum mechanics without Einstein as T. S. Kuhn, Stachel, Stone, Brown, and many other physicists and historians of physics have acknowledged. For Dan Hopper to imply that Einstein's dislike of Quantum Mechanics meant that he didn't contribute to it other than being a critic of it is not just patently false but the shows a distinct lack of intellectual honesty. Did Einstein dislike certain elements of quantum theory, yes. Did he criticize it frequently, yes. But he also contributed most of the original concepts that would make it's way into the theory (including the aforementioned wave-particle duality, B-E Condensates, Intrinsic randomness, and Entanglement, to name only some). Einsteins big issue with quantum mechanics was not that it was probabilistic - after all his 1916-1919 papers on Spontaneous Emission introduced intrinsic randomness into quantum theory - but that Bohr insisted on the idea that the "observer" directly influenced measurements and experiments. That felt like, cheap superstitious reasoning to Einstein as Wolfgang Pauli pointed out in a letter to Max Born Poor video. I recommend to anybody interested in learning about Einstein's IMMENSE contributions to Quantum mechanics to read two books starting with: 1. Einstein and the Quantum: The Quest of the Valiant Swabian by Douglas Stone And 2. My God, He plays Dice!: How Albert Einstein Invented Most of Quantum Physics by Bob Doyle To quote a peer of Dan Hopper, Cal Tech physicist Sean Carroll: "If anything, Einstein is underrated; he understood quantum mechanics better than anybody ever has."
This video is nonsense. This is why you hire a Historian OF Physics (or a historian of science), and not an actual physicist, to talk about the history of physics. Dan Hopper is an excellent physicist but poor historian of physics. There are many errors with this lecture. Einstein contributed more to quantum theory than any other physicist in history. Einstein didn't just write the photoelectric paper, he quantized the radiation field. He then followed that up with his seminal paper on the Specific Heat of Solids. He then followed that up with another seminal paper on Phonons. He then followed that up with a revolutionary paper on Wave-Particle Duality. De Broglie almost literally copied Einsteins equation, applied it to electrons, and won his Nobel Prize on matter waves (which he would never have been able to do without Einsteins paper). Einstein, using ingenuous statistical arguments, did this 13 years BEFORE De Broglie did. Bohrs work on electron orbits (discontinuous transitions) was also a direct byproduct of Einstein's work from 1905 to 1910. Einsteins work on Spontaneous and Stimulated Emission, as codified in the Nobel-Prize worthy Einstein A and B Coefficients, created the foundation for the LASER. Einsteins work on Bose-Einstein Statistics and Bose-Einstein Condensates, in which Einstein, and Einstein ALONE, predicted the Boson (which, due to historical reasons was incorrectly named) which created Condesed Matter physics - an entirely new state of matter. Without this work of Einstein's, superconductivity would be impossible. Without Einstein's work in this area, Schrodinger likely never derives the proper equation for the wave function as he always acknowledged. It was Einstein who first conceived of what would essentially later become the Born Rule, according to Max Born himself, by interpreting the "square of the optical wave amplitudes as probability density for the occurence of photons." Max Born took Einsteins work - which Einstein had applied to a gas of photons - and simply applied it to a gas of electrons. And then won a Nobel Prize for it (Born, much like Schrodinger, was effusive in his praise for Einstein). Einstein was the first to discover Entanglement, something that Bohr, Dirac, Heisenberg and Schrodinger etc all missed. Einsteins seminal EPR Paradox paper laid the foundation for quantum information theory as Clauser, Aspect, and others have widely acknowledged. There is no quantum mechanics without Einstein as T. S. Kuhn, Stachel, Stone, Brown, and many other physicists and historians of physics have acknowledged. For Dan Hopper to imply that Einstein's dislike of Quantum Mechanics meant that he didn't contribute to it other than being a critic of it is not just patently false but the shows a distinct lack of intellectual honesty. Did Einstein dislike certain elements of quantum theory, yes. Did he criticize it frequently, yes. But he also contributed most of the original concepts that would make it's way into the theory (including the aforementioned wave-particle duality, B-E Condensates, Intrinsic randomness, and Entanglement, to name only some). Einsteins big issue with quantum mechanics was not that it was probabilistic - after all his 1916-1919 papers on Spontaneous Emission introduced intrinsic randomness into quantum theory - but that Bohr insisted on the idea that the "observer" directly influenced measurements and experiments. That felt like, cheap superstitious reasoning to Einstein as Wolfgang Pauli pointed out in a letter to Max Born Poor video. I recommend to anybody interested in learning about Einstein's IMMENSE contributions to Quantum mechanics to read two books starting with: 1. Einstein and the Quantum: The Quest of the Valiant Swabian by Douglas Stone And 2. My God, He plays Dice!: How Albert Einstein Invented Most of Quantum Physics by Bob Doyle To quote a peer of Dan Hopper, Cal Tech physicist Sean Carroll: "If anything, Einstein is underrated; he understood quantum mechanics better than anybody ever has."
Quran "We will show them Our signs in the horizons and within themselves until it becomes clear to them that it is the truth. But is it not sufficient concerning your Lord that He is, over all things, a Witness?" Quran "Travel through the land and observe how He began creation. Then Allah will produce the final creation. Indeed Allah, over all things, is competent." Quran "Recite in the name of your Lord who created - Created man from a clinging substance. Recite, and your Lord is the most Generous - Who taught by the pen - Taught man that which he knew not. Quran " And it is He who created the heavens and the earth in six days - and His Throne had been upon water - that He might test you as to which of you is best in deed. But if you say, "Indeed, you are resurrected after death," those who disbelieve will surely say, "This is not but obvious magic."" Quran " And it is He who has created from water a human being " Quran "we made from water every living thing? Then will they not believe?" Quran "And the heaven We constructed with strength, and indeed, We are [its] expander."
No he plays chess with our lives againts the devil everyday...we the poor are the pawns and the rich and wealthy are his king,queen,rook,bishop and nights....thats why we the poor die first because we are his pawns. We get sacrificed for the rich and wealthy.
in Islam "as my understanding" to Quran, there is the followings 1- there is 7 universe and each universe have one earth [ total 7 universe and 7 earths] “ It is Allah who has created seven heavens and of the earth, the like of them. [His] command descends among them so you may know that Allah is over all things competent and that Allah has encompassed all things in knowledge.” CH65-V12 2- the shape of the universe is flat [like layer] .and we are in the lowest universe. “ And We have created above you seven layered heavens, and never have We been of [Our] creation unaware.” CH23-V17 “[And] who created seven heavens in layers. You do not see in the creation of the Most Merciful any inconsistency. So, return [your] vision [to the sky]; do you see any breaks?” CH67-V3 “We have adorned the lower heaven with the adornment of the stars”. CH37-6 “The Day when We will fold the heaven like the folding of a [written] sheet for the records. As We began the first creation, so we shall bring it back again. [That is] a promise binding upon Us. Indeed, we will do it.” cH21-104 Have those who disbelieved not considered that the heavens and the earth were a joined entity, and We separated them and made from water every living thing? Then will they not believe? “The Day when We will fold the heaven like the folding of a [written] sheet for the records. As We began the first creation, so we shall bring it back again. [That is] a promise binding upon Us. Indeed, we will do it.” cH21-104
Quran : "Originator of the heavens and the earth. When He decrees a matter, He only says to it, "Be," and it is." Quran :" And Our command is but one, like a glance of the eye." Quran : "And to Allah belongs the unseen [aspects] of the heavens and the earth. And the command for the Hour (of Judgment) is not but as a glance of the eye or even nearer. Indeed, Allah is over all things competent." Quran : "Originator of the heavens and the earth. When He decrees a matter, He only says to it, "Be," and it is. Quran : And the heaven We constructed with strength, and indeed, We are [its] expander.
This is the best of UA-cam.
The more I learn about quantum mechanics and field theory, the more I truly believe we are in a simulation, existing within a computer program. The particles we see when we make the observation are essentially a bit of information, and the field is all the possibilities that the program is capable of displaying. But the sad part is there may be no way to ever prove this.
If we are capable of creating our own simulation, there is a high probability that we are a simulation because it is more probable for a Boltzman brain to assemble from quantum foam than intelligence to develop from evolution. 😁😁😁😁
We it was actually proven when 1982 Alain aspect experiment. The world is fuzzy and God does play dice
I love UA-cam so much. I could listen to stuff like this all day
Be sure to watch all of the Feynman lectures and interviews.
Then when you hear it in a classroom and it is important that you understand to pass an exam, for some reason you fall fast asleep. 😆😆😆😆
50k views *love youtube*
stuff like this is infinite...
did you understand?
@@appy96 no
This has a bearing on human free will. If the position and momentum of the electrons in your brain are unpredictable, then you are not predestined to do anything. Your future actions are random, but that does not mean you have free will. Your future actions are unpredictable, even to you.
But not to GOD.
Fascinating. Could someone please post a link to the previous lecture which Dr. Dan Hooper introduces the concepts of quantum physics? Thanks
A fresh new science lecture...!!
Looking forward to more of it...
This video is nonsense. Einstein contributed more to quantum theory than any other physicist in history.
Einstein didn't just write the photoelectric paper, he quantized the radiation field.
He then followed that up with his seminal paper on the Specific Heat of Solids.
He then followed that up with another seminal paper on Phonons.
He then followed that up with a revolutionary paper on Wave-Particle Duality. De Broglie almost literally copied Einsteins equation, applied it to electrons, and won his Nobel Prize on matter waves (which he would never have been able to do without Einsteins paper). Einstein, using ingenuous statistical arguments, did this 13 years BEFORE De Broglie did.
Bohrs work on electron orbits (discontinuous transitions) was also a direct byproduct of Einstein's work from 1905 to 1910.
Einsteins work on Spontaneous and Stimulated Emission, as codified in the Nobel-Prize worthy Einstein A and B Coefficients, created the foundation for the LASER.
Einsteins work on Bose-Einstein Statistics and Bose-Einstein Condensates, in which Einstein, and Einstein ALONE, predicted the Boson (which, due to historical reasons was incorrectly named) which created Condesed Matter physics - an entirely new state of matter. Without this work of Einstein's, superconductivity would be impossible. Without Einstein's work in this area, Schrodinger likely never derives the proper equation for the wave function as he always acknowledged.
It was Einstein who first conceived of what would essentially later become the Born Rule, according to Max Born himself, by interpreting the "square of the optical wave amplitudes as probability density for the occurence of photons." Max Born took Einsteins work - which Einstein had applied to a gas of photons - and simply applied it to a gas of electrons. And then won a Nobel Prize for it (Born, much like Schrodinger, was effusive in his praise for Einstein).
Einstein was the first to discover Entanglement, something that Bohr, Dirac, Heisenberg and Schrodinger etc all missed. Einsteins seminal EPR Paradox paper laid the foundation for quantum information theory as Clauser, Aspect, and others have widely acknowledged.
There is no quantum mechanics without Einstein as T. S. Kuhn, Stachel, Stone, Brown, and many other physicists and historians of physics have acknowledged.
For Dan Hopper to imply that Einstein's dislike of Quantum Mechanics meant that he didn't contribute to it other than being a critic of it is not just patently false but the shows a distinct lack of intellectual honesty. Did Einstein dislike certain elements of quantum theory, yes. Did he criticize it frequently, yes. But he also contributed most of the original concepts that would make it's way into the theory (including the aforementioned wave-particle duality, B-E Condensates, Intrinsic randomness, and Entanglement, to name only some). Einsteins big issue with quantum mechanics was not that it was probabilistic - after all his 1916-1919 papers on Spontaneous Emission introduced intrinsic randomness into quantum theory - but that Bohr insisted on the idea that the "observer" directly influenced measurements and experiments. That felt like, cheap superstitious reasoning to Einstein as Wolfgang Pauli pointed out in a letter to Max Born
Poor video. I recommend to anybody interested in learning about Einstein's IMMENSE contributions to Quantum mechanics to read two books starting with:
1. Einstein and the Quantum: The Quest of the Valiant Swabian by Douglas Stone
And
2. My God, He plays Dice!: How Albert Einstein Invented Most of Quantum Physics by Bob Doyle
To quote Sean Carroll "If anything, Einstein is underrated; he understood quantum mechanics better than anybody ever has."
Excellent summary enjoyed.
Very complicated subject explained in simple terms.
Thank you 💓
God doesn't play dice, but he does run the casino and takes the vig (entropy).
God would of course always know in advance, how the dice roll. So no point even thinking about it. ✌️
@@mikethunman436 The casino operator doesn't care about the minutia of an individual outcome, when the overall outcome is already known (entropy).
If all future events at least in priciple can be calculated and predicted with perfect acuracy, can we predicted what someone will do next year..?
And, if that is the case, what happens if you tell that person what he will do next year? Is telling him what causes that to happen? Or did you just change the outcome?
Excellent summary
More like God plays pool.
Double combo bank shot, asteroid to Earth, Earth in corner pocket.
Could we be the dice players? This is an invitation to see a theory where light is both a wave and a particle, with a probabilistic future (∆×∆pᵪ≥h/4π), continuously unfolding in relation to the electron probability cloud of atoms and the wavelength of light. According to this theory, the wave-particle duality of light and matter (electrons) creates a blank canvas that we can interact with forming a future relative to the energy and momentum of our actions. This interaction is represented by a constant of action in space and time, mathematically denoted as the Planck constant h/2π. This concept is supported by the continuous exchange of light photon energy (∆E=hf) into the kinetic energy (Eₖ=½mv²) of matter, in the form of electrons.
Thank you for presenting this material so well
This video is nonsense. Einstein contributed more to quantum theory than any other physicist in history.
Einstein didn't just write the photoelectric paper, he quantized the radiation field.
He then followed that up with his seminal paper on the Specific Heat of Solids.
He then followed that up with another seminal paper on Phonons.
He then followed that up with a revolutionary paper on Wave-Particle Duality. De Broglie almost literally copied Einsteins equation, applied it to electrons, and won his Nobel Prize on matter waves (which he would never have been able to do without Einsteins paper). Einstein, using ingenuous statistical arguments, did this 13 years BEFORE De Broglie did.
Bohrs work on electron orbits (discontinuous transitions) was also a direct byproduct of Einstein's work from 1905 to 1910.
Einsteins work on Spontaneous and Stimulated Emission, as codified in the Nobel-Prize worthy Einstein A and B Coefficients, created the foundation for the LASER.
Einsteins work on Bose-Einstein Statistics and Bose-Einstein Condensates, in which Einstein, and Einstein ALONE, predicted the Boson (which, due to historical reasons was incorrectly named) which created Condesed Matter physics - an entirely new state of matter. Without this work of Einstein's, superconductivity would be impossible. Without Einstein's work in this area, Schrodinger likely never derives the proper equation for the wave function as he always acknowledged.
It was Einstein who first conceived of what would essentially later become the Born Rule, according to Max Born himself, by interpreting the "square of the optical wave amplitudes as probability density for the occurence of photons." Max Born took Einsteins work - which Einstein had applied to a gas of photons - and simply applied it to a gas of electrons. And then won a Nobel Prize for it (Born, much like Schrodinger, was effusive in his praise for Einstein).
Einstein was the first to discover Entanglement, something that Bohr, Dirac, Heisenberg and Schrodinger etc all missed. Einsteins seminal EPR Paradox paper laid the foundation for quantum information theory as Clauser, Aspect, and others have widely acknowledged.
There is no quantum mechanics without Einstein as T. S. Kuhn, Stachel, Stone, Brown, and many other physicists and historians of physics have acknowledged.
For Dan Hopper to imply that Einstein's dislike of Quantum Mechanics meant that he didn't contribute to it other than being a critic of it is not just patently false but the shows a distinct lack of intellectual honesty. Did Einstein dislike certain elements of quantum theory, yes. Did he criticize it frequently, yes. But he also contributed most of the original concepts that would make it's way into the theory (including the aforementioned wave-particle duality, B-E Condensates, Intrinsic randomness, and Entanglement, to name only some). Einsteins big issue with quantum mechanics was not that it was probabilistic - after all his 1916-1919 papers on Spontaneous Emission introduced intrinsic randomness into quantum theory - but that Bohr insisted on the idea that the "observer" directly influenced measurements and experiments. That felt like, cheap superstitious reasoning to Einstein as Wolfgang Pauli pointed out in a letter to Max Born
Poor video. I recommend to anybody interested in learning about Einstein's IMMENSE contributions to Quantum mechanics to read two books starting with:
1. Einstein and the Quantum: The Quest of the Valiant Swabian by Douglas Stone
And
2. My God, He plays Dice!: How Albert Einstein Invented Most of Quantum Physics by Bob Doyle
To quote Sean Carroll "If anything, Einstein is underrated; he understood quantum mechanics better than anybody ever has."
Excellent lecture.
This video is nonsense. This is why you hire a Historian OF Physics (or a historian of science), and not an actual physicist, to talk about the history of physics. Dan Hopper is an excellent physicist but poor historian of physics. There are many errors with this lecture.
Einstein contributed more to quantum theory than any other physicist in history.
Einstein didn't just write the photoelectric paper, he quantized the radiation field.
He then followed that up with his seminal paper on the Specific Heat of Solids.
He then followed that up with another seminal paper on Phonons.
He then followed that up with a revolutionary paper on Wave-Particle Duality. De Broglie almost literally copied Einsteins equation, applied it to electrons, and won his Nobel Prize on matter waves (which he would never have been able to do without Einsteins paper). Einstein, using ingenuous statistical arguments, did this 13 years BEFORE De Broglie did.
Bohrs work on electron orbits (discontinuous transitions) was also a direct byproduct of Einstein's work from 1905 to 1910.
Einsteins work on Spontaneous and Stimulated Emission, as codified in the Nobel-Prize worthy Einstein A and B Coefficients, created the foundation for the LASER.
Einsteins work on Bose-Einstein Statistics and Bose-Einstein Condensates, in which Einstein, and Einstein ALONE, predicted the Boson (which, due to historical reasons was incorrectly named) which created Condesed Matter physics - an entirely new state of matter. Without this work of Einstein's, superconductivity would be impossible. Without Einstein's work in this area, Schrodinger likely never derives the proper equation for the wave function as he always acknowledged.
It was Einstein who first conceived of what would essentially later become the Born Rule, according to Max Born himself, by interpreting the "square of the optical wave amplitudes as probability density for the occurence of photons." Max Born took Einsteins work - which Einstein had applied to a gas of photons - and simply applied it to a gas of electrons. And then won a Nobel Prize for it (Born, much like Schrodinger, was effusive in his praise for Einstein).
Einstein was the first to discover Entanglement, something that Bohr, Dirac, Heisenberg and Schrodinger etc all missed. Einsteins seminal EPR Paradox paper laid the foundation for quantum information theory as Clauser, Aspect, and others have widely acknowledged.
There is no quantum mechanics without Einstein as T. S. Kuhn, Stachel, Stone, Brown, and many other physicists and historians of physics have acknowledged.
For Dan Hopper to imply that Einstein's dislike of Quantum Mechanics meant that he didn't contribute to it other than being a critic of it is not just patently false but the shows a distinct lack of intellectual honesty. Did Einstein dislike certain elements of quantum theory, yes. Did he criticize it frequently, yes. But he also contributed most of the original concepts that would make it's way into the theory (including the aforementioned wave-particle duality, B-E Condensates, Intrinsic randomness, and Entanglement, to name only some). Einsteins big issue with quantum mechanics was not that it was probabilistic - after all his 1916-1919 papers on Spontaneous Emission introduced intrinsic randomness into quantum theory - but that Bohr insisted on the idea that the "observer" directly influenced measurements and experiments. That felt like, cheap superstitious reasoning to Einstein as Wolfgang Pauli pointed out in a letter to Max Born
Poor video. I recommend to anybody interested in learning about Einstein's IMMENSE contributions to Quantum mechanics to read two books starting with:
1. Einstein and the Quantum: The Quest of the Valiant Swabian by Douglas Stone
And
2. My God, He plays Dice!: How Albert Einstein Invented Most of Quantum Physics by Bob Doyle
To quote a peer of Dan Hopper, Cal Tech physicist Sean Carroll: "If anything, Einstein is underrated; he understood quantum mechanics better than anybody ever has."
Nice lectures
Awesome lecture ..!!!
This video is nonsense. This is why you hire a Historian OF Physics (or a historian of science), and not an actual physicist, to talk about the history of physics. Dan Hopper is an excellent physicist but poor historian of physics. There are many errors with this lecture.
Einstein contributed more to quantum theory than any other physicist in history.
Einstein didn't just write the photoelectric paper, he quantized the radiation field.
He then followed that up with his seminal paper on the Specific Heat of Solids.
He then followed that up with another seminal paper on Phonons.
He then followed that up with a revolutionary paper on Wave-Particle Duality. De Broglie almost literally copied Einsteins equation, applied it to electrons, and won his Nobel Prize on matter waves (which he would never have been able to do without Einsteins paper). Einstein, using ingenuous statistical arguments, did this 13 years BEFORE De Broglie did.
Bohrs work on electron orbits (discontinuous transitions) was also a direct byproduct of Einstein's work from 1905 to 1910.
Einsteins work on Spontaneous and Stimulated Emission, as codified in the Nobel-Prize worthy Einstein A and B Coefficients, created the foundation for the LASER.
Einsteins work on Bose-Einstein Statistics and Bose-Einstein Condensates, in which Einstein, and Einstein ALONE, predicted the Boson (which, due to historical reasons was incorrectly named) which created Condesed Matter physics - an entirely new state of matter. Without this work of Einstein's, superconductivity would be impossible. Without Einstein's work in this area, Schrodinger likely never derives the proper equation for the wave function as he always acknowledged.
It was Einstein who first conceived of what would essentially later become the Born Rule, according to Max Born himself, by interpreting the "square of the optical wave amplitudes as probability density for the occurence of photons." Max Born took Einsteins work - which Einstein had applied to a gas of photons - and simply applied it to a gas of electrons. And then won a Nobel Prize for it (Born, much like Schrodinger, was effusive in his praise for Einstein).
Einstein was the first to discover Entanglement, something that Bohr, Dirac, Heisenberg and Schrodinger etc all missed. Einsteins seminal EPR Paradox paper laid the foundation for quantum information theory as Clauser, Aspect, and others have widely acknowledged.
There is no quantum mechanics without Einstein as T. S. Kuhn, Stachel, Stone, Brown, and many other physicists and historians of physics have acknowledged.
For Dan Hopper to imply that Einstein's dislike of Quantum Mechanics meant that he didn't contribute to it other than being a critic of it is not just patently false but the shows a distinct lack of intellectual honesty. Did Einstein dislike certain elements of quantum theory, yes. Did he criticize it frequently, yes. But he also contributed most of the original concepts that would make it's way into the theory (including the aforementioned wave-particle duality, B-E Condensates, Intrinsic randomness, and Entanglement, to name only some). Einsteins big issue with quantum mechanics was not that it was probabilistic - after all his 1916-1919 papers on Spontaneous Emission introduced intrinsic randomness into quantum theory - but that Bohr insisted on the idea that the "observer" directly influenced measurements and experiments. That felt like, cheap superstitious reasoning to Einstein as Wolfgang Pauli pointed out in a letter to Max Born
Poor video. I recommend to anybody interested in learning about Einstein's IMMENSE contributions to Quantum mechanics to read two books starting with:
1. Einstein and the Quantum: The Quest of the Valiant Swabian by Douglas Stone
And
2. My God, He plays Dice!: How Albert Einstein Invented Most of Quantum Physics by Bob Doyle
To quote a peer of Dan Hopper, Cal Tech physicist Sean Carroll: "If anything, Einstein is underrated; he understood quantum mechanics better than anybody ever has."
The camera cuts are both a wave and a particle
The camera cuts are overused and goofy. I couldn’t even listen to the lecture, I was waiting for a camera cut haha
Excellent presentation 👍👍👍🙏
This video is nonsense. This is why you hire a Historian OF Physics (or a historian of science), and not an actual physicist, to talk about the history of physics. Dan Hopper is an excellent physicist but poor historian of physics. There are many errors with this lecture.
Einstein contributed more to quantum theory than any other physicist in history.
Einstein didn't just write the photoelectric paper, he quantized the radiation field.
He then followed that up with his seminal paper on the Specific Heat of Solids.
He then followed that up with another seminal paper on Phonons.
He then followed that up with a revolutionary paper on Wave-Particle Duality. De Broglie almost literally copied Einsteins equation, applied it to electrons, and won his Nobel Prize on matter waves (which he would never have been able to do without Einsteins paper). Einstein, using ingenuous statistical arguments, did this 13 years BEFORE De Broglie did.
Bohrs work on electron orbits (discontinuous transitions) was also a direct byproduct of Einstein's work from 1905 to 1910.
Einsteins work on Spontaneous and Stimulated Emission, as codified in the Nobel-Prize worthy Einstein A and B Coefficients, created the foundation for the LASER.
Einsteins work on Bose-Einstein Statistics and Bose-Einstein Condensates, in which Einstein, and Einstein ALONE, predicted the Boson (which, due to historical reasons was incorrectly named) which created Condesed Matter physics - an entirely new state of matter. Without this work of Einstein's, superconductivity would be impossible. Without Einstein's work in this area, Schrodinger likely never derives the proper equation for the wave function as he always acknowledged.
It was Einstein who first conceived of what would essentially later become the Born Rule, according to Max Born himself, by interpreting the "square of the optical wave amplitudes as probability density for the occurence of photons." Max Born took Einsteins work - which Einstein had applied to a gas of photons - and simply applied it to a gas of electrons. And then won a Nobel Prize for it (Born, much like Schrodinger, was effusive in his praise for Einstein).
Einstein was the first to discover Entanglement, something that Bohr, Dirac, Heisenberg and Schrodinger etc all missed. Einsteins seminal EPR Paradox paper laid the foundation for quantum information theory as Clauser, Aspect, and others have widely acknowledged.
There is no quantum mechanics without Einstein as T. S. Kuhn, Stachel, Stone, Brown, and many other physicists and historians of physics have acknowledged.
For Dan Hopper to imply that Einstein's dislike of Quantum Mechanics meant that he didn't contribute to it other than being a critic of it is not just patently false but the shows a distinct lack of intellectual honesty. Did Einstein dislike certain elements of quantum theory, yes. Did he criticize it frequently, yes. But he also contributed most of the original concepts that would make it's way into the theory (including the aforementioned wave-particle duality, B-E Condensates, Intrinsic randomness, and Entanglement, to name only some). Einsteins big issue with quantum mechanics was not that it was probabilistic - after all his 1916-1919 papers on Spontaneous Emission introduced intrinsic randomness into quantum theory - but that Bohr insisted on the idea that the "observer" directly influenced measurements and experiments. That felt like, cheap superstitious reasoning to Einstein as Wolfgang Pauli pointed out in a letter to Max Born
Poor video. I recommend to anybody interested in learning about Einstein's IMMENSE contributions to Quantum mechanics to read two books starting with:
1. Einstein and the Quantum: The Quest of the Valiant Swabian by Douglas Stone
And
2. My God, He plays Dice!: How Albert Einstein Invented Most of Quantum Physics by Bob Doyle
To quote a peer of Dan Hopper, Cal Tech physicist Sean Carroll: "If anything, Einstein is underrated; he understood quantum mechanics better than anybody ever has."
So what if Einstein was not talking about the god of the bible or of any other religion? Whose says you need a specific religion to address God? Einstein used the term God so obviously he meant God. "God does not play dice with the universe". That's quite a definitive statement if you ask me. So the question is... We understand that an atheist denies God for himself... But why must an atheist deny God for another? Especially if that other one (Einstein in this case) is very clear about what he's saying.
Scientist's in a short ten thousand years from now are going to believe that we (alive now) were ignorant beyond belief 😂
Thank you Prof. Hooper..!
Eagerly waiting for the next lecture. 😍
Happy to hear you enjoyed it, Rasika! Happy learning!
Just as i do! He's fresh, isn't he?
This video is nonsense. Einstein contributed more to quantum theory than any other physicist in history.
Einstein didn't just write the photoelectric paper, he quantized the radiation field.
He then followed that up with his seminal paper on the Specific Heat of Solids.
He then followed that up with another seminal paper on Phonons.
He then followed that up with a revolutionary paper on Wave-Particle Duality. De Broglie almost literally copied Einsteins equation, applied it to electrons, and won his Nobel Prize on matter waves (which he would never have been able to do without Einsteins paper). Einstein, using ingenuous statistical arguments, did this 13 years BEFORE De Broglie did.
Bohrs work on electron orbits (discontinuous transitions) was also a direct byproduct of Einstein's work from 1905 to 1910.
Einsteins work on Spontaneous and Stimulated Emission, as codified in the Nobel-Prize worthy Einstein A and B Coefficients, created the foundation for the LASER.
Einsteins work on Bose-Einstein Statistics and Bose-Einstein Condensates, in which Einstein, and Einstein ALONE, predicted the Boson (which, due to historical reasons was incorrectly named) which created Condesed Matter physics - an entirely new state of matter. Without this work of Einstein's, superconductivity would be impossible. Without Einstein's work in this area, Schrodinger likely never derives the proper equation for the wave function as he always acknowledged.
It was Einstein who first conceived of what would essentially later become the Born Rule, according to Max Born himself, by interpreting the "square of the optical wave amplitudes as probability density for the occurence of photons." Max Born took Einsteins work - which Einstein had applied to a gas of photons - and simply applied it to a gas of electrons. And then won a Nobel Prize for it (Born, much like Schrodinger, was effusive in his praise for Einstein).
Einstein was the first to discover Entanglement, something that Bohr, Dirac, Heisenberg and Schrodinger etc all missed. Einsteins seminal EPR Paradox paper laid the foundation for quantum information theory as Clauser, Aspect, and others have widely acknowledged.
There is no quantum mechanics without Einstein as T. S. Kuhn, Stachel, Stone, Brown, and many other physicists and historians of physics have acknowledged.
For Dan Hopper to imply that Einstein's dislike of Quantum Mechanics meant that he didn't contribute to it other than being a critic of it is not just patently false but the shows a distinct lack of intellectual honesty. Did Einstein dislike certain elements of quantum theory, yes. Did he criticize it frequently, yes. But he also contributed most of the original concepts that would make it's way into the theory (including the aforementioned wave-particle duality, B-E Condensates, Intrinsic randomness, and Entanglement, to name only some). Einsteins big issue with quantum mechanics was not that it was probabilistic - after all his 1916-1919 papers on Spontaneous Emission introduced intrinsic randomness into quantum theory - but that Bohr insisted on the idea that the "observer" directly influenced measurements and experiments. That felt like, cheap superstitious reasoning to Einstein as Wolfgang Pauli pointed out in a letter to Max Born
Poor video. I recommend to anybody interested in learning about Einstein's IMMENSE contributions to Quantum mechanics to read two books starting with:
1. Einstein and the Quantum: The Quest of the Valiant Swabian by Douglas Stone
And
2. My God, He plays Dice!: How Albert Einstein Invented Most of Quantum Physics by Bob Doyle
To quote Sean Carroll "If anything, Einstein is underrated; he understood quantum mechanics better than anybody ever has."
Many-world interpretation brings back the perfect determism, the universe does not play dice.
Most reputable physicists do not like many worlds the best. I think you just like many worlds the best. There are many debates on this stuff from reputable physicist, and after the debate they take votes. Unfortunately the Copenhagen interpretation is still most popular as far as I know. But even then it’s like 30 percent of PhD physicists. Many worlds comes in second. Even if it’s changed since I last checked and many worlds is the most popular, it’s still only gonna be a 30 or 40 percent consensus. So you cannot go around saying most “reputable” physicists like many worlds the best. There is one particularly nice talk on UA-cam where four physicists put fourth their argument for 4 separate interpretations. Brian green hosts it. Sean Carroll argues for many worlds, which is whom I suspect you listen to a lot. Sean is great, but he loves him some many worlds
That's ooooold
This video is nonsense. This is why you hire a Historian OF Physics (or a historian of science), and not an actual physicist, to talk about the history of physics. Dan Hopper is an excellent physicist but poor historian of physics. There are many errors with this lecture.
Einstein contributed more to quantum theory than any other physicist in history.
Einstein didn't just write the photoelectric paper, he quantized the radiation field.
He then followed that up with his seminal paper on the Specific Heat of Solids.
He then followed that up with another seminal paper on Phonons.
He then followed that up with a revolutionary paper on Wave-Particle Duality. De Broglie almost literally copied Einsteins equation, applied it to electrons, and won his Nobel Prize on matter waves (which he would never have been able to do without Einsteins paper). Einstein, using ingenuous statistical arguments, did this 13 years BEFORE De Broglie did.
Bohrs work on electron orbits (discontinuous transitions) was also a direct byproduct of Einstein's work from 1905 to 1910.
Einsteins work on Spontaneous and Stimulated Emission, as codified in the Nobel-Prize worthy Einstein A and B Coefficients, created the foundation for the LASER.
Einsteins work on Bose-Einstein Statistics and Bose-Einstein Condensates, in which Einstein, and Einstein ALONE, predicted the Boson (which, due to historical reasons was incorrectly named) which created Condesed Matter physics - an entirely new state of matter. Without this work of Einstein's, superconductivity would be impossible. Without Einstein's work in this area, Schrodinger likely never derives the proper equation for the wave function as he always acknowledged.
It was Einstein who first conceived of what would essentially later become the Born Rule, according to Max Born himself, by interpreting the "square of the optical wave amplitudes as probability density for the occurence of photons." Max Born took Einsteins work - which Einstein had applied to a gas of photons - and simply applied it to a gas of electrons. And then won a Nobel Prize for it (Born, much like Schrodinger, was effusive in his praise for Einstein).
Einstein was the first to discover Entanglement, something that Bohr, Dirac, Heisenberg and Schrodinger etc all missed. Einsteins seminal EPR Paradox paper laid the foundation for quantum information theory as Clauser, Aspect, and others have widely acknowledged.
There is no quantum mechanics without Einstein as T. S. Kuhn, Stachel, Stone, Brown, and many other physicists and historians of physics have acknowledged.
For Dan Hopper to imply that Einstein's dislike of Quantum Mechanics meant that he didn't contribute to it other than being a critic of it is not just patently false but the shows a distinct lack of intellectual honesty. Did Einstein dislike certain elements of quantum theory, yes. Did he criticize it frequently, yes. But he also contributed most of the original concepts that would make it's way into the theory (including the aforementioned wave-particle duality, B-E Condensates, Intrinsic randomness, and Entanglement, to name only some). Einsteins big issue with quantum mechanics was not that it was probabilistic - after all his 1916-1919 papers on Spontaneous Emission introduced intrinsic randomness into quantum theory - but that Bohr insisted on the idea that the "observer" directly influenced measurements and experiments. That felt like, cheap superstitious reasoning to Einstein as Wolfgang Pauli pointed out in a letter to Max Born
Poor video. I recommend to anybody interested in learning about Einstein's IMMENSE contributions to Quantum mechanics to read two books starting with:
1. Einstein and the Quantum: The Quest of the Valiant Swabian by Douglas Stone
And
2. My God, He plays Dice!: How Albert Einstein Invented Most of Quantum Physics by Bob Doyle
To quote a peer of Dan Hopper, Cal Tech physicist Sean Carroll: "If anything, Einstein is underrated; he understood quantum mechanics better than anybody ever has."
@@johndoe-sh6bi Copenhagen interpretation of QM is rubbish. It basically says QM is FUNDAMENTALY irreducible. That is patent nonsense as MOST philosophers of physics have acknowledged .
@@richardromero6193 I dont think there's a consensus to be honest. When I was in grad school, my advisor was a Bohmian. There really is no real consensus about the correct interpretation of QM. And, in fact, thank to Einsteins persistence on pointing Entanglement in his seminal EPR Correlations paper, Quantum Information Theory HAS to parse out what entanglement really is in order to make substantive progress in the field. QM is clearly not the last word on the matter.
To what extent was Einstein aware of and familiar with Henri Poincaré's work which laid the foundations for Chaos Theory? Also, what was his understanding of the problem of knowing the instantaneous (or initial) phase of the wave function? Even a simple precision sinusoid is unpredictable if the initial (or instantaneous) phase is not known in advance.
2 19
2 48
3 52
Gravity ⭕⭕⭕
11 53
14 45
I love quantum physics
But don't you think the wave function is spinning, as well? ... In fact, it definitely has to, right? And if it is indeed more like a particle and hardly acts like a wave then how do you explain red-shift and blue-shift phenomenon of observation of distant Galaxys, or rather the color spectrum Doppler effect? Because in that specific instance it does behave more like a 2-dimensional wave and less like a 3-dimensional particle, or 2-dimensional spin/spinning wave. I'm having a little hard time understanding that such a tiny photon can be wave-compressed or stretched, especially with the 1st example at the very beginning. Well, I wouldn't say that a photon could be in all places at the same time but rather it's energy until it is measured and collapsed to a certain degree probable area location. And I wonder if you can influence a photon to be found in location 'A' rather than 'B'? I do however, believe in God, and maybe this is his way to keep us busy.
Not bad but still only a classical overview of the history of QM; the main fault is not mentioning the cause for De Broglie's "material" wave interpretation and the plenty of paradoxes arising from it like the "moving" "particle" would have higher energy and then higher frequency (E=hf) but according to Relativity Theory, the effect is the opposite: f'=f(1- (v/c)^2)^ (-1/2)- the consequence of Lorentz formula for the light's source. At the background is a typical physicist's lack of knowledge of the. methodology of his own subject matter (in general: philosophy of science, esp. not distinguishing between a (mathematical)model and the (laboratory) data,here, esp. forgetting that Jacobi-Hamilton mathematical models of "wave" and a "particle" was not a physical "things" but just a model to explain other data of experiments (available only later). Consequently, talking about the wave of a ball or any tiny rigid body (being) is a total para science that forgets that QM is a statistical theory and does not deal with an "object"! More; any statistical (or probability law) is the same deterministic as any classical physics laws but it only deals with the sets of objects. Nothing mysterious here. The name Heisenberg's Uncertainty is a deception and a thought experiment for Heisenberg's microscope is misleading as treating an "electron" as traveling and consequently it suggest His) momentum is a function of speed but that is not the case if the datum is treated as the interaction of a measuring device with a field(wave) that does not move but is standing (on the definition)
I can relate to Einstein's blockage. I have a fundamental, seemingly in built rejection of the theories of probability and statistics. This was a dead end for a career in the biological science of ecology.. Unless one can bypass such a feeling, or lie and build upon that lie, it is a career dead end in many ways.
This video is nonsense. Einstein contributed more to quantum theory than any other physicist in history.
Einstein didn't just write the photoelectric paper, he quantized the radiation field.
He then followed that up with his seminal paper on the Specific Heat of Solids.
He then followed that up with another seminal paper on Phonons.
He then followed that up with a revolutionary paper on Wave-Particle Duality. De Broglie almost literally copied Einsteins equation, applied it to electrons, and won his Nobel Prize on matter waves (which he would never have been able to do without Einsteins paper). Einstein, using ingenuous statistical arguments, did this 13 years BEFORE De Broglie did.
Bohrs work on electron orbits (discontinuous transitions) was also a direct byproduct of Einstein's work from 1905 to 1910.
Einsteins work on Spontaneous and Stimulated Emission, as codified in the Nobel-Prize worthy Einstein A and B Coefficients, created the foundation for the LASER.
Einsteins work on Bose-Einstein Statistics and Bose-Einstein Condensates, in which Einstein, and Einstein ALONE, predicted the Boson (which, due to historical reasons was incorrectly named) which created Condesed Matter physics - an entirely new state of matter. Without this work of Einstein's, superconductivity would be impossible. Without Einstein's work in this area, Schrodinger likely never derives the proper equation for the wave function as he always acknowledged.
It was Einstein who first conceived of what would essentially later become the Born Rule, according to Max Born himself, by interpreting the "square of the optical wave amplitudes as probability density for the occurence of photons." Max Born took Einsteins work - which Einstein had applied to a gas of photons - and simply applied it to a gas of electrons. And then won a Nobel Prize for it (Born, much like Schrodinger, was effusive in his praise for Einstein).
Einstein was the first to discover Entanglement, something that Bohr, Dirac, Heisenberg and Schrodinger etc all missed. Einsteins seminal EPR Paradox paper laid the foundation for quantum information theory as Clauser, Aspect, and others have widely acknowledged.
There is no quantum mechanics without Einstein as T. S. Kuhn, Stachel, Stone, Brown, and many other physicists and historians of physics have acknowledged.
For Dan Hopper to imply that Einstein's dislike of Quantum Mechanics meant that he didn't contribute to it other than being a critic of it is not just patently false but the shows a distinct lack of intellectual honesty. Did Einstein dislike certain elements of quantum theory, yes. Did he criticize it frequently, yes. But he also contributed most of the original concepts that would make it's way into the theory (including the aforementioned wave-particle duality, B-E Condensates, Intrinsic randomness, and Entanglement, to name only some). Einsteins big issue with quantum mechanics was not that it was probabilistic - after all his 1916-1919 papers on Spontaneous Emission introduced intrinsic randomness into quantum theory - but that Bohr insisted on the idea that the "observer" directly influenced measurements and experiments. That felt like, cheap superstitious reasoning to Einstein as Wolfgang Pauli pointed out in a letter to Max Born
Poor video. I recommend to anybody interested in learning about Einstein's IMMENSE contributions to Quantum mechanics to read two books starting with:
1. Einstein and the Quantum: The Quest of the Valiant Swabian by Douglas Stone
And
2. My God, He plays Dice!: How Albert Einstein Invented Most of Quantum Physics by Bob Doyle
To quote Sean Carroll "If anything, Einstein is underrated; he understood quantum mechanics better than anybody ever has."
So it works like this. God created the universe, the big bang. You ask: how? This is how. God created what I call the Expanding Graviton. The expanding graviton has 3 main properties. 1) Gravitons are wave functions. Wave functions have quantum states for momentum/position/energy/spin. 2) Expanding gravitons are the carriers of the physics constants. The difference between superstring mathematics and Expanding gravitons is that Expanding gravitons are endowed with physical existence by virtue of being the carriers of the physics constants. 3) Expanding gravitons are called expanding gravitons because they expand at the speed of light with radius r = speed of light * time. This is the foundation of relativity and was inspired by the time dilation derivation of which critics should familiarize themselves with. When wave functions are part of a quantum system, like the hydrogen wave function, it is because the charges have overcome a very tiny, very neglible amount of energy required to capture the expanding graviton, making it a captured graviton. Dark energy is the graviton "capture" energy of all of the gravitons that exist in the universe, today. Gravitons are continually being created (by events?). The inflationary epoch of the big bang can be explained by the creation of gravitons at an accelerated rate, many orders of magnitude higher than normal. The surface area of an expanding graviton is a virtual photon. So, the Creator created the first graviton. Squeezed it down to an energy E = hf = energy of the big bang. This corresponds to a wavelength of about the diameter of a graviton, lambda = c/f. Lambda = Planck constant*speed of light/energy of the big bang. Energy of the big bang is approximately 10^70 joules. So the wavelength is about 10^ -96 meters which is a lot smaller than the Planck scale. Then, God said, Let there be light. Big bang.
If the object is not spherical it will not go round the nucleus is that simple, do not drown your self in the cup of water guys, only time atom is wave, when it wasn't atom at all. like before formations or time of lightening. Atoms just claps from sphere to wave.
Where can I find the next lecture that follows this one?
Hi Calvin, this video is episode eight from the series "What Einstein Got Wrong", Presented by Dan Hooper. Learn more: www.wondrium.com/what-einstein-got-wrong
This video is nonsense. This is why you hire a Historian OF Physics (or a historian of science), and not an actual physicist, to talk about the history of physics. Dan Hopper is an excellent physicist but poor historian of physics. There are many errors with this lecture.
Einstein contributed more to quantum theory than any other physicist in history.
Einstein didn't just write the photoelectric paper, he quantized the radiation field.
He then followed that up with his seminal paper on the Specific Heat of Solids.
He then followed that up with another seminal paper on Phonons.
He then followed that up with a revolutionary paper on Wave-Particle Duality. De Broglie almost literally copied Einsteins equation, applied it to electrons, and won his Nobel Prize on matter waves (which he would never have been able to do without Einsteins paper). Einstein, using ingenuous statistical arguments, did this 13 years BEFORE De Broglie did.
Bohrs work on electron orbits (discontinuous transitions) was also a direct byproduct of Einstein's work from 1905 to 1910.
Einsteins work on Spontaneous and Stimulated Emission, as codified in the Nobel-Prize worthy Einstein A and B Coefficients, created the foundation for the LASER.
Einsteins work on Bose-Einstein Statistics and Bose-Einstein Condensates, in which Einstein, and Einstein ALONE, predicted the Boson (which, due to historical reasons was incorrectly named) which created Condesed Matter physics - an entirely new state of matter. Without this work of Einstein's, superconductivity would be impossible. Without Einstein's work in this area, Schrodinger likely never derives the proper equation for the wave function as he always acknowledged.
It was Einstein who first conceived of what would essentially later become the Born Rule, according to Max Born himself, by interpreting the "square of the optical wave amplitudes as probability density for the occurence of photons." Max Born took Einsteins work - which Einstein had applied to a gas of photons - and simply applied it to a gas of electrons. And then won a Nobel Prize for it (Born, much like Schrodinger, was effusive in his praise for Einstein).
Einstein was the first to discover Entanglement, something that Bohr, Dirac, Heisenberg and Schrodinger etc all missed. Einsteins seminal EPR Paradox paper laid the foundation for quantum information theory as Clauser, Aspect, and others have widely acknowledged.
There is no quantum mechanics without Einstein as T. S. Kuhn, Stachel, Stone, Brown, and many other physicists and historians of physics have acknowledged.
For Dan Hopper to imply that Einstein's dislike of Quantum Mechanics meant that he didn't contribute to it other than being a critic of it is not just patently false but the shows a distinct lack of intellectual honesty. Did Einstein dislike certain elements of quantum theory, yes. Did he criticize it frequently, yes. But he also contributed most of the original concepts that would make it's way into the theory (including the aforementioned wave-particle duality, B-E Condensates, Intrinsic randomness, and Entanglement, to name only some). Einsteins big issue with quantum mechanics was not that it was probabilistic - after all his 1916-1919 papers on Spontaneous Emission introduced intrinsic randomness into quantum theory - but that Bohr insisted on the idea that the "observer" directly influenced measurements and experiments. That felt like, cheap superstitious reasoning to Einstein as Wolfgang Pauli pointed out in a letter to Max Born
Poor video. I recommend to anybody interested in learning about Einstein's IMMENSE contributions to Quantum mechanics to read two books starting with:
1. Einstein and the Quantum: The Quest of the Valiant Swabian by Douglas Stone
And
2. My God, He plays Dice!: How Albert Einstein Invented Most of Quantum Physics by Bob Doyle
To quote a peer of Dan Hopper, Cal Tech physicist Sean Carroll: "If anything, Einstein is underrated; he understood quantum mechanics better than anybody ever has."
@@TheGreatCourses Would be nice if you guys were as obsessed about the things Einstein got right, which you've omitted (e.g. Bose-Einstein Condensates are pretty damn important to physics, his Spontaneous and Stimulated Emission trilogy of paper is pretty damn important to physics, etc), as you are about the things he "got wrong."
Go read Max Born's Nobel lecture and tell me Einstein was "wrong" when he conceived of, and then gift wrapped, the idea that led to Max Born's Nobel Prize.
Disappointed. Why aren't you doing an eponymous series on what "Isaac Newton Got Wrong?" (Hint: lots of things).
Very disappointed.
I assume you’ll eventually get to spooky action at a distance being explained by determinism but since I already know the outcome ...
What does that mean?
Why black whole goes to singularity ? can you expain, any idea about this .i think ...........
It seems very unlikely that this is so. That its only a probability where a electron happens. I suggest the rerror is in the presumption light is a wave or a particle. instead its a thing that only manifests itself in a wave or particle based on resistence. The darkness being the resister. just as light is resisted by glass or water etc.
Explain Quantum Eraser
Why black whole goes to singularity ? can you explain it ..if u can't then i can explain.
conscious unity and freedom
And who wins?
Somehow ...anyway good lecture...its just remarkable how politicaly correct the lamguage of the old physicist
What is described here about Einsteins view on Quantum Mechanics are cliches. There is a whole book with the letters exchanged between Einstein and Max Born.
Einstein himself explicitly denied believing in a deterministic world view.
Einstein was not so much concerned about the probabilistic nature of the Quantum world (though the quote is correct) but about what he called "spooky action at a distance" (spukhafte Fernwirkung in German) and what is now called Non-locality. The first time he brought this up was by a thought experiment at the Solvay conference 1927.
It is also a cliche Niels Bohr always found a convincing answer to Einsteins thought experiments. He did sometimes and at other time did not even understand what Einstein aimed at.
There is no scientific consensus on the Kopenhagen interpretation, not now and never was and their disciples could never agree between each other what it meant.
There is only a Kopenhagen mysticism.
Schrödinger like Einstein never agreed to the Kopenhagen views (that is why Schrödinger constructed his famous cat thought experiment) nor did John Bell and many other.
For a more balanced view read the Book of Douglas Stone (Physicist professor at Yale university) : Einstein and the Quantum.
God, play dice with the universe BUT he use loaded dice
Everybody knows dice is loaded by Leonard Cohen
This video is nonsense. This is why you hire a Historian OF Physics (or a historian of science), and not an actual physicist, to talk about the history of physics. Dan Hopper is an excellent physicist but poor historian of physics. There are many errors with this lecture.
Einstein contributed more to quantum theory than any other physicist in history.
Einstein didn't just write the photoelectric paper, he quantized the radiation field.
He then followed that up with his seminal paper on the Specific Heat of Solids.
He then followed that up with another seminal paper on Phonons.
He then followed that up with a revolutionary paper on Wave-Particle Duality. De Broglie almost literally copied Einsteins equation, applied it to electrons, and won his Nobel Prize on matter waves (which he would never have been able to do without Einsteins paper). Einstein, using ingenuous statistical arguments, did this 13 years BEFORE De Broglie did.
Bohrs work on electron orbits (discontinuous transitions) was also a direct byproduct of Einstein's work from 1905 to 1910.
Einsteins work on Spontaneous and Stimulated Emission, as codified in the Nobel-Prize worthy Einstein A and B Coefficients, created the foundation for the LASER.
Einsteins work on Bose-Einstein Statistics and Bose-Einstein Condensates, in which Einstein, and Einstein ALONE, predicted the Boson (which, due to historical reasons was incorrectly named) which created Condesed Matter physics - an entirely new state of matter. Without this work of Einstein's, superconductivity would be impossible. Without Einstein's work in this area, Schrodinger likely never derives the proper equation for the wave function as he always acknowledged.
It was Einstein who first conceived of what would essentially later become the Born Rule, according to Max Born himself, by interpreting the "square of the optical wave amplitudes as probability density for the occurence of photons." Max Born took Einsteins work - which Einstein had applied to a gas of photons - and simply applied it to a gas of electrons. And then won a Nobel Prize for it (Born, much like Schrodinger, was effusive in his praise for Einstein).
Einstein was the first to discover Entanglement, something that Bohr, Dirac, Heisenberg and Schrodinger etc all missed. Einsteins seminal EPR Paradox paper laid the foundation for quantum information theory as Clauser, Aspect, and others have widely acknowledged.
There is no quantum mechanics without Einstein as T. S. Kuhn, Stachel, Stone, Brown, and many other physicists and historians of physics have acknowledged.
For Dan Hopper to imply that Einstein's dislike of Quantum Mechanics meant that he didn't contribute to it other than being a critic of it is not just patently false but the shows a distinct lack of intellectual honesty. Did Einstein dislike certain elements of quantum theory, yes. Did he criticize it frequently, yes. But he also contributed most of the original concepts that would make it's way into the theory (including the aforementioned wave-particle duality, B-E Condensates, Intrinsic randomness, and Entanglement, to name only some). Einsteins big issue with quantum mechanics was not that it was probabilistic - after all his 1916-1919 papers on Spontaneous Emission introduced intrinsic randomness into quantum theory - but that Bohr insisted on the idea that the "observer" directly influenced measurements and experiments. That felt like, cheap superstitious reasoning to Einstein as Wolfgang Pauli pointed out in a letter to Max Born
Poor video. I recommend to anybody interested in learning about Einstein's IMMENSE contributions to Quantum mechanics to read two books starting with:
1. Einstein and the Quantum: The Quest of the Valiant Swabian by Douglas Stone
And
2. My God, He plays Dice!: How Albert Einstein Invented Most of Quantum Physics by Bob Doyle
To quote a peer of Dan Hopper, Cal Tech physicist Sean Carroll: "If anything, Einstein is underrated; he understood quantum mechanics better than anybody ever has."
WTF was that, didn't read it because My comment wad a tease
Can anybody also answer, who would have created god too or how would have god emerged?
Which God? God of the Bible is eternal. Do you know what Eternal means?
But is it possible to have something existing without something creating it? Wouldn't it be more logical if the existence was "eternal"and infinite allowed sentient beeing to emerge and create god to explain what they can't prove or understand? @@bunnypoop4508
If God plays dice, whatever the result, the outcome leaves us to do the right thing to advance human civilization.
This guy is already wrong. Einstein was referencing that there is order to quantum physics hence the quote, "God doesn't play dice with the universe". Einstein already knew there is order in the universe which humans perceive as chaos.
It’s all happened by chance including earth. Billions of years to come up with the right combination. It’s like winning a lottery in the vast universe.
Nope but Rupert Murdoch does!
Love this man's lecture. He speaks in a continuous manner. His thoughts are so organized and well thought out. No pauses, back tracking or well-uh or you- know phrases of hesitancy or indecision. I have never heard this kind of presentation before where the speaker is so knowledgeable about the subject matter that he can communicate his thoughts in a continuous flow of complete sentences! I am thoroughly impressed. He must be an incredible teaching professor! I wish I could speak like this, or even better, I wish my thoughts were half as organized as his!
Thank you so much for your kind feedback, Calvin! We truly pride ourselves on our professors and the depth of our content and are very glad you're enjoying our offerings. Thanks for being a fan!
He's a phenomenal physicist and a great teacher of physics.
However, this video is partly about the history of physics and in this department he gets a lot wrong.
This is why you hire a Historian OF Physics (or a historian of science), and not an actual physicist, to talk about the history of physics. Dan Hopper is an excellent physicist but poor historian of physics. There are many errors with this lecture.
Einstein contributed more to quantum theory than any other physicist in history.
Einstein didn't just write the photoelectric paper, he quantized the radiation field.
He then followed that up with his seminal paper on the Specific Heat of Solids.
He then followed that up with another seminal paper on Phonons.
He then followed that up with a revolutionary paper on Wave-Particle Duality. De Broglie almost literally copied Einsteins equation, applied it to electrons, and won his Nobel Prize on matter waves (which he would never have been able to do without Einsteins paper). Einstein, using ingenuous statistical arguments, did this 13 years BEFORE De Broglie did.
Bohrs work on electron orbits (discontinuous transitions) was also a direct byproduct of Einstein's work from 1905 to 1910.
Einsteins work on Spontaneous and Stimulated Emission, as codified in the Nobel-Prize worthy Einstein A and B Coefficients, created the foundation for the LASER.
Einsteins work on Bose-Einstein Statistics and Bose-Einstein Condensates, in which Einstein, and Einstein ALONE, predicted the Boson (which, due to historical reasons was incorrectly named) which created Condesed Matter physics - an entirely new state of matter. Without this work of Einstein's, superconductivity would be impossible. Without Einstein's work in this area, Schrodinger likely never derives the proper equation for the wave function as he always acknowledged.
It was Einstein who first conceived of what would essentially later become the Born Rule, according to Max Born himself, by interpreting the "square of the optical wave amplitudes as probability density for the occurence of photons." Max Born took Einsteins work - which Einstein had applied to a gas of photons - and simply applied it to a gas of electrons. And then won a Nobel Prize for it (Born, much like Schrodinger, was effusive in his praise for Einstein).
Einstein was the first to discover Entanglement, something that Bohr, Dirac, Heisenberg and Schrodinger etc all missed. Einsteins seminal EPR Paradox paper laid the foundation for quantum information theory as Clauser, Aspect, and others have widely acknowledged.
There is no quantum mechanics without Einstein as T. S. Kuhn, Stachel, Stone, Brown, and many other physicists and historians of physics have acknowledged.
For Dan Hopper to imply that Einstein's dislike of Quantum Mechanics meant that he didn't contribute to it other than being a critic of it is not just patently false but the shows a distinct lack of intellectual honesty. Did Einstein dislike certain elements of quantum theory, yes. Did he criticize it frequently, yes. But he also contributed most of the original concepts that would make it's way into the theory (including the aforementioned wave-particle duality, B-E Condensates, Intrinsic randomness, and Entanglement, to name only some). Einsteins big issue with quantum mechanics was not that it was probabilistic - after all his 1916-1919 papers on Spontaneous Emission introduced intrinsic randomness into quantum theory - but that Bohr insisted on the idea that the "observer" directly influenced measurements and experiments. That felt like, cheap superstitious reasoning to Einstein as Wolfgang Pauli pointed out in a letter to Max Born
Poor video. I recommend to anybody interested in learning about Einstein's IMMENSE contributions to Quantum mechanics to read two books starting with:
1. Einstein and the Quantum: The Quest of the Valiant Swabian by Douglas Stone
And
2. My God, He plays Dice!: How Albert Einstein Invented Most of Quantum Physics by Bob Doyle
To quote a peer of Dan Hopper, Cal Tech physicist Sean Carroll: "If anything, Einstein is underrated; he understood quantum mechanics better than anybody ever has."
Do you mean do the gods play dice? Well yes. And a certain barbarian through a 7.
Has anyone stopped to think that an extruded piece of massless plasma into the eye of an atom, as all nuclear particles must be, can take on a number of behaviour patterns dependant upon the influences upon it. The Four key patterns would be particle form...wave form...cloud form, and invisible, undetectable form, and can change from one to the other in a nanosecond. The key to it all is the higgs-field because this is the imploding force that sucked all this massless material into the atom in the first place...dependant upon the strength of implosion when sucking in each layer of plasma, and which varies between the strong nuclear force to the much reduced weak force. This higgs implosion is a separate universal force than the others because it has a kicking force of 186000 mps left over from the original shockwaves that passed through the universe at the time of its Creation making the higgs-field the true God Particle which can unravel all universal atomic mysteries.
Normally God does not play dices but when he is threatened by us then he will play dices with the universe.
where is the gravity of a particle who's probability has not collapsed?
No ... Silly thought
🧿 ⏩ ♾️ ...💛 (From Chintu to Einstein and beyond)
That depends which god you are talking about
I don't mean to be a class clown but.... 👋ing. Also who knows that Meaningwave exists?
I think light is thinest particles in the univers this act as wave i can proved that .........................other waves(only wave )thinest
next episode?
This video is nonsense. This is why you hire a Historian OF Physics (or a historian of science), and not an actual physicist, to talk about the history of physics. Dan Hopper is an excellent physicist but poor historian of physics. There are many errors with this lecture.
Einstein contributed more to quantum theory than any other physicist in history.
Einstein didn't just write the photoelectric paper, he quantized the radiation field.
He then followed that up with his seminal paper on the Specific Heat of Solids.
He then followed that up with another seminal paper on Phonons.
He then followed that up with a revolutionary paper on Wave-Particle Duality. De Broglie almost literally copied Einsteins equation, applied it to electrons, and won his Nobel Prize on matter waves (which he would never have been able to do without Einsteins paper). Einstein, using ingenuous statistical arguments, did this 13 years BEFORE De Broglie did.
Bohrs work on electron orbits (discontinuous transitions) was also a direct byproduct of Einstein's work from 1905 to 1910.
Einsteins work on Spontaneous and Stimulated Emission, as codified in the Nobel-Prize worthy Einstein A and B Coefficients, created the foundation for the LASER.
Einsteins work on Bose-Einstein Statistics and Bose-Einstein Condensates, in which Einstein, and Einstein ALONE, predicted the Boson (which, due to historical reasons was incorrectly named) which created Condesed Matter physics - an entirely new state of matter. Without this work of Einstein's, superconductivity would be impossible. Without Einstein's work in this area, Schrodinger likely never derives the proper equation for the wave function as he always acknowledged.
It was Einstein who first conceived of what would essentially later become the Born Rule, according to Max Born himself, by interpreting the "square of the optical wave amplitudes as probability density for the occurence of photons." Max Born took Einsteins work - which Einstein had applied to a gas of photons - and simply applied it to a gas of electrons. And then won a Nobel Prize for it (Born, much like Schrodinger, was effusive in his praise for Einstein).
Einstein was the first to discover Entanglement, something that Bohr, Dirac, Heisenberg and Schrodinger etc all missed. Einsteins seminal EPR Paradox paper laid the foundation for quantum information theory as Clauser, Aspect, and others have widely acknowledged.
There is no quantum mechanics without Einstein as T. S. Kuhn, Stachel, Stone, Brown, and many other physicists and historians of physics have acknowledged.
For Dan Hopper to imply that Einstein's dislike of Quantum Mechanics meant that he didn't contribute to it other than being a critic of it is not just patently false but the shows a distinct lack of intellectual honesty. Did Einstein dislike certain elements of quantum theory, yes. Did he criticize it frequently, yes. But he also contributed most of the original concepts that would make it's way into the theory (including the aforementioned wave-particle duality, B-E Condensates, Intrinsic randomness, and Entanglement, to name only some). Einsteins big issue with quantum mechanics was not that it was probabilistic - after all his 1916-1919 papers on Spontaneous Emission introduced intrinsic randomness into quantum theory - but that Bohr insisted on the idea that the "observer" directly influenced measurements and experiments. That felt like, cheap superstitious reasoning to Einstein as Wolfgang Pauli pointed out in a letter to Max Born
Poor video. I recommend to anybody interested in learning about Einstein's IMMENSE contributions to Quantum mechanics to read two books starting with:
1. Einstein and the Quantum: The Quest of the Valiant Swabian by Douglas Stone
And
2. My God, He plays Dice!: How Albert Einstein Invented Most of Quantum Physics by Bob Doyle
To quote a peer of Dan Hopper, Cal Tech physicist Sean Carroll: "If anything, Einstein is underrated; he understood quantum mechanics better than anybody ever has."
@@feynmanschwingere_mc2270 i am not interested in who done that i want to know how its works.
The Secret of the Old One and yet Einstein did not believe in God. 😁😁😁😁
This video is nonsense. This is why you hire a Historian OF Physics (or a historian of science), and not an actual physicist, to talk about the history of physics. Dan Hopper is an excellent physicist but poor historian of physics. There are many errors with this lecture.
Einstein contributed more to quantum theory than any other physicist in history.
Einstein didn't just write the photoelectric paper, he quantized the radiation field.
He then followed that up with his seminal paper on the Specific Heat of Solids.
He then followed that up with another seminal paper on Phonons.
He then followed that up with a revolutionary paper on Wave-Particle Duality. De Broglie almost literally copied Einsteins equation, applied it to electrons, and won his Nobel Prize on matter waves (which he would never have been able to do without Einsteins paper). Einstein, using ingenuous statistical arguments, did this 13 years BEFORE De Broglie did.
Bohrs work on electron orbits (discontinuous transitions) was also a direct byproduct of Einstein's work from 1905 to 1910.
Einsteins work on Spontaneous and Stimulated Emission, as codified in the Nobel-Prize worthy Einstein A and B Coefficients, created the foundation for the LASER.
Einsteins work on Bose-Einstein Statistics and Bose-Einstein Condensates, in which Einstein, and Einstein ALONE, predicted the Boson (which, due to historical reasons was incorrectly named) which created Condesed Matter physics - an entirely new state of matter. Without this work of Einstein's, superconductivity would be impossible. Without Einstein's work in this area, Schrodinger likely never derives the proper equation for the wave function as he always acknowledged.
It was Einstein who first conceived of what would essentially later become the Born Rule, according to Max Born himself, by interpreting the "square of the optical wave amplitudes as probability density for the occurence of photons." Max Born took Einsteins work - which Einstein had applied to a gas of photons - and simply applied it to a gas of electrons. And then won a Nobel Prize for it (Born, much like Schrodinger, was effusive in his praise for Einstein).
Einstein was the first to discover Entanglement, something that Bohr, Dirac, Heisenberg and Schrodinger etc all missed. Einsteins seminal EPR Paradox paper laid the foundation for quantum information theory as Clauser, Aspect, and others have widely acknowledged.
There is no quantum mechanics without Einstein as T. S. Kuhn, Stachel, Stone, Brown, and many other physicists and historians of physics have acknowledged.
For Dan Hopper to imply that Einstein's dislike of Quantum Mechanics meant that he didn't contribute to it other than being a critic of it is not just patently false but the shows a distinct lack of intellectual honesty. Did Einstein dislike certain elements of quantum theory, yes. Did he criticize it frequently, yes. But he also contributed most of the original concepts that would make it's way into the theory (including the aforementioned wave-particle duality, B-E Condensates, Intrinsic randomness, and Entanglement, to name only some). Einsteins big issue with quantum mechanics was not that it was probabilistic - after all his 1916-1919 papers on Spontaneous Emission introduced intrinsic randomness into quantum theory - but that Bohr insisted on the idea that the "observer" directly influenced measurements and experiments. That felt like, cheap superstitious reasoning to Einstein as Wolfgang Pauli pointed out in a letter to Max Born
Poor video. I recommend to anybody interested in learning about Einstein's IMMENSE contributions to Quantum mechanics to read two books starting with:
1. Einstein and the Quantum: The Quest of the Valiant Swabian by Douglas Stone
And
2. My God, He plays Dice!: How Albert Einstein Invented Most of Quantum Physics by Bob Doyle
To quote a peer of Dan Hopper, Cal Tech physicist Sean Carroll: "If anything, Einstein is underrated; he understood quantum mechanics better than anybody ever has."
My teacher was so ignorant about this 🤔 he didn't teach all this stuff
actually, the universe uses 'god' as a dice.
Although I do not have the ability to understand higher mathematics and physics, I believe that God exists, and that God created the universe. I believe that God is also greater than the universe that we are trying to understand with our tools of science and mathematics; Likewise, human beings are greater than a building or car or anything that human beings make. A clay pot is not made by accident. A nicely kept garden or car or building or meal at a restaurant... none of that is done by accident. I think Albert Einstein is correct that God does not play dice. God does not play dice because God CANNOT play dice! When you are the creator of the universe, and greater than all that we try to fathom..., you can not play dice. Likewise, when we see a clay pot or finely designed car or delicious meal,... we know that none of that was done by accident or random roll of dice... To us, we made these things on purpose, for a reason. However, to a tiny ant or fly looking at human beings, maybe they cannot fully fathom what we are doing! To the fly or tiny ant, our actions are like a random, unpredictable series of events! Likewise, as Einstein thought we are like insects stuck in a giant soap bubble, maybe we are looking at God and trying to fathom something well beyond our ability to comprehend, like insects trying to understand human beings.
Proverbs 16:33 tells us that God doesn't play dice and in this verse we can see Matthew 6:33, when we choose to seek first for the kingdom of God and His righteousness the we know that everything doesn't just happen accidently because it's God ordaining us according to His good will for our lives.
God doesn’t play dice with the universe. The universe plays dice with us and sometimes God loads the dice for us. Pretty simple, oh but you probably have the idea of God indoctrinated out of you.
God and the devil are playing chess, with the world as the arena
Any flat versers out there?
We are the dice.
And sky is the board?
No loves to play chess againts the devil and were his pawns,bishops,rooks and nights.
Both Relativity and Quantum Mechanics are fatally flawed.
Bohr was right, Einstein liked to think of himself as God. After all, only God could merely imagine a universe and it would miraculously be the one we live in. Especially when we are required to suspend logic from the start, in order to be able to accept the premise. According to Einstein's logic, when you drive your car, you are always traveling at top speed, it is only the number of lines and spaces on the road that are constantly changing and that is what gives us the impression of change in speed.
And there is no reason to suggest that the speed of light is any type of constant and/or limit and that time is in anyway variable. As Einstein does. All human experience proves that time is not variable and if they understood light, they would understand why starlight flickers and that the speed of light, affects its frequency and frequency determines speed, of "source light." However, in reflected light, all photons recoil at the same rate, so in reflected light, all frequencies travel at the same speed and it is the distances between photons that changes, to produce what modern science refers to as, polarized light. It is the difference in velocity of photons, of different frequencies, from sources of stellar light, that produces the colored twinkling of pulsars and other intermittent sources, that demonstrate difference in speed, of the various colors of light, when they alternate between red, yellow and blue pulses, which are visible to the naked eye.
And Einstein was right about Quantum mechanics and God. Quantum Mechanics is also based on contradictions and that means the theory is false and there is no magic and nothing exists in more than one place at a time. These are counter intuitive, which means, they are illogical. Logic is the only tool we have to understand the physical universe, if we must suspend logic for even an instant, what ever follows becomes a fantasy and a fiction and has no place in the science of Physics.
Both sides of this debate use the same language. They both refer to the "wave behavior" of photons and electrons and both Einstein and Quantum Mechanics, not to mention all of science, keeps conflating the physical manifestation of the particles, with their shared "behavior" and implying that they are the same thing. A particle's physical manifestation is the same no matter what its behavior. You are the same person whether you behave like an idiot or not. Double-slit experiments have shown that individual photons do not produce an interference pattern, so they are always "particles", that exhibit wave behavior and there is no contradiction or duality and nothing exists in two different states at the same time....... THERE IS NO MAGIC IN PHYSICS!.... and GOD DOES NOT PLAY DICE!
Both Einstein and Quantum Mechanics refuse to accept the fact of the quantum nature of everything. It was his own erroneous theories that confounded Einstein and prevented him from accepting his own theory of quanta. And Quantum Mechanics is contradicting their own theory of individual quanta to suggest that a particle exists everywhere at once. Which demonstrates a complete lack of understanding of subatomic structure.
There is only one model of subatomic structure that fits everything: The Halflec Model. A true quantum structure and no magic or doublethink required.
Bohr, according to MOST contemporary physicists, was talking nonsense in the Bohr Einstein debates. Neither of them, strictly speaking, was correct about the final verdict of quantum mechanics but Einstein at least had rational arguments unlike Bohr who constantly retreated into scientific mysticism.
This video is nonsense. Einstein contributed more to quantum theory than any other physicist in history.
Einstein didn't just write the photoelectric paper, he quantized the radiation field.
He then followed that up with his seminal paper on the Specific Heat of Solids.
He then followed that up with another seminal paper on Phonons.
He then followed that up with a revolutionary paper on Wave-Particle Duality. De Broglie almost literally copied Einsteins equation, applied it to electrons, and won his Nobel Prize on matter waves (which he would never have been able to do without Einsteins paper). Einstein, using ingenuous statistical arguments, did this 13 years BEFORE De Broglie did.
Bohrs work on electron orbits (discontinuous transitions) was also a direct byproduct of Einstein's work from 1905 to 1910.
Einsteins work on Spontaneous and Stimulated Emission, as codified in the Nobel-Prize worthy Einstein A and B Coefficients, created the foundation for the LASER.
Einsteins work on Bose-Einstein Statistics and Bose-Einstein Condensates, in which Einstein, and Einstein ALONE, predicted the Boson (which, due to historical reasons was incorrectly named) which created Condesed Matter physics - an entirely new state of matter. Without this work of Einstein's, superconductivity would be impossible. Without Einstein's work in this area, Schrodinger likely never derives the proper equation for the wave function as he always acknowledged.
It was Einstein who first conceived of what would essentially later become the Born Rule, according to Max Born himself, by interpreting the "square of the optical wave amplitudes as probability density for the occurence of photons." Max Born took Einsteins work - which Einstein had applied to a gas of photons - and simply applied it to a gas of electrons. And then won a Nobel Prize for it (Born, much like Schrodinger, was effusive in his praise for Einstein).
Einstein was the first to discover Entanglement, something that Bohr, Dirac, Heisenberg and Schrodinger etc all missed. Einsteins seminal EPR Paradox paper laid the foundation for quantum information theory as Clauser, Aspect, and others have widely acknowledged.
There is no quantum mechanics without Einstein as T. S. Kuhn, Stachel, Stone, Brown, and many other physicists and historians of physics have acknowledged.
For Dan Hopper to imply that Einstein's dislike of Quantum Mechanics meant that he didn't contribute to it other than being a critic of it is not just patently false but the shows a distinct lack of intellectual honesty. Did Einstein dislike certain elements of quantum theory, yes. Did he criticize it frequently, yes. But he also contributed most of the original concepts that would make it's way into the theory (including the aforementioned wave-particle duality, B-E Condensates, Intrinsic randomness, and Entanglement, to name only some). Einsteins big issue with quantum mechanics was not that it was probabilistic - after all his 1916-1919 papers on Spontaneous Emission introduced intrinsic randomness into quantum theory - but that Bohr insisted on the idea that the "observer" directly influenced measurements and experiments. That felt like, cheap superstitious reasoning to Einstein as Wolfgang Pauli pointed out in a letter to Max Born
Poor video. I recommend to anybody interested in learning about Einstein's IMMENSE contributions to Quantum mechanics to read two books starting with:
1. Einstein and the Quantum: The Quest of the Valiant Swabian by Douglas Stone
And
2. My God, He plays Dice!: How Albert Einstein Invented Most of Quantum Physics by Bob Doyle
To quote Sean Carroll "If anything, Einstein is underrated; he understood quantum mechanics better than anybody ever has."
Spooky science
I will just say what I think is happening, and it does indeed involve God playing dice. There are two different ways to travel faster than light, which can as a matter of fact be represented in the Minkowski formalism. In the way which exchanges spacelike and timelike intervals we can have wavelike behaviour with both constructive and destructive interference, and this is what the Schroedinger equation is describing. In the other way which exchanges energy and momentum we have tachyonic Brownian motion which is orthogonal to the first way, complying with the principle that modification of the Schroedinger equation is prohibited. TBM is often almost invisible, but it does come into play when matter interacts with the electromagnetic field in nonlinear fashion, leading to a classically random outcome and no Schroedinger's cat issue.
Don't believe me? Well I want to work out how a computer simulation can make use of a random number generator, so alternative suggestions are welcome. Just watch that point about not modifying the Schroedinger equation at the ensemble level.
Why is a rainbow always in a bent D shape.
Don't understand the question: what's god?
God is the reason why the laws of physics and the physics constants exist at all.
@@wulphstein still don't get that, because how do you know that?
God isn’t a judgemental figure that controls the universe but yet all is controlled under it and it is the bases of all existence. Matter is always in a changing process, because energy is always in a changing process. Energy moves and transfers the moment intention isn’t given. Movement comes the moment intention is given. Intention is given the moment clinging to matter arises. Everything relies on another thing. One thing relies on another thing to move, to change, just to create or transfer into another thing. Ever-changing constancy comes from ever changing intentions. Thus nothing can settle. Not matter, not thoughts, not energy. The First Law of Thermodynamics (Conservation) states that energy is always conserved, it cannot be created or destroyed. Every piece of existence can only change as it always is, creating and preserving and destroying. Again, this ever changing universe , causing suffering is made by intent. This itself is samsara. creation is creating through the transfer of energy. Creation starts when intent arises, which arises from attachment or grasping. How can attachment or clinging arise? Because of awareness. How can awareness arise? Does it? No. It is unchanging, always still. Everything comes in motion because of awareness. Everything, creation, preserving and destroying is a derivative of being aware. Of settled stillness. Thus movement can arise, thus energy transfers, matter evolves. Everything arises and dissolves back into its origin. Pure nothingness. Mind dissolves after death, physical body decays. Energy stays changing and awareness stays as it is. That which all evolves around and all’s origin. The father of quantum physics, Max Planck, had realised that “consciousness is fundamental; even matter gets derived from consciousness. I regard consciousness as fundamental. I regard matter as derivative from consciousness. We cannot get behind consciousness. Everything that we talk about, everything that we regard as existing, postulates consciousness." Max Planck had also said, "All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force which brings the particle of an atom to vibration and holds this most minute solar system of the atom together. We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent mind. This mind is the matrix of all matter."
Why? All starts from awareness witness consciousness. I now separate bodily consciousness and the witness awareness everything evolves around. Why? The witness consciousness (awareness) doesn’t fade even as bodily consciousness fades. Say one hits their head to test how easily consciousness fades. They then say “Consciousness is changing, I feel me becoming more unaware when I hit my head.” To this sentence i propose this statement back. What is aware that awareness of the body and mind is fading? You say “I feel me becoming unconscious” and such. Who is that “I” which is aware thus being spoken outwardly as such? The witness doesn’t fade, everything else does. Even plants are aware , why else does energy constantly change under its movements, and it too changes under energetic movement caused by another force. Because a plant is aware of physical phenomenon, it can grow and change as done. As Max Planck stated, everything is a derivative of this. The Buddha in many lectures to the Buddhist monks , laymen, laywomen, bodhisattvas, etc stressed nothing coming of it’s own origin. Not matter, thoughts, ego, etc. Everything is influenced by others due to intent being made from clinging thus causes creation to arise. It has no origin of its own. As in the shurangama sutra the Buddha personally says everything arises from “Bodhi”. From the self. From awareness - consciousness. Nothing else has it’s one origin or settled being. All situates around beingness. Bodhi. Hum (the one consciousness in which there is the full form of both wisdom and method as one undifferentiable entity/ spirit.) Albert Einstein has to say this. "A human being is a part of the whole, called by us 'Universe,' a part limited in time and space. He experiences himself, his thoughts and feelings as something separate from the rest - a kind of optical delusion of his consciousness. This delusion is a kind of prison for us, restricting us to our personal desires and to affection for a few persons nearest to us. Our task must be to free ourselves from this prison by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature in its beauty. “ As long as action (karma) stays samsara (unsettled movement/ creation, preserving, destruction). As long as that stays, conscious witness awareness can’t be united with. To give up attachment and clinging, intention stops, when intention stops desire is fully dissolved. Thus no more delusions of the mind can be created. Such as false realities of ego, suffering, etc. We must notice physical phenomenon isn’t any different from the witness origin.
Study Advaita Vedanta to know what “God” is. But God itself is just an idea. It is the process of clinging onto that which is eternal, awareness, thus a label of empty origin is created. This is an idea of the attaching mind. Science two is just an idea of cleaning onto physical phenomenon which we are aware of. As I said physical existence does not come of its own origin and everything relies on another to create and equal. As I stated before everything is able to be moving and evolving because it all arises from awareness. Without awareness no intentions or no movement can even happen to create universe. As the Buddha had stated all arises from Bodhi. Advaita Vedanta texts are also very good to look into if one is trying to understand eternal reality which all revolves around.
@@Chase_Istre But how do u know all of that? Is that faith-based knowledge?
@@willyh.r.1216 no try it out for yourself. you are never not this. is your arm aware of its arm? are your eyes aware of their surroundings? does your touch nerves aware of the touch? no you are not this body. when you are thinking what is aware of your thoughts? you say “I am thinking” , what is aware you are thinking? This is awareness. The witness. Because you are aware of your surroundings you can cling onto it thus thoughts arise due to intention. You do this every moment of your life. Let’s take an example. Because you are aware of the bodily sensation, let’s say you feel the need to urinate, because you’re aware of the body you make the intent to get up and go urinate. Because you are aware of phenomenon intentions arise. When clinging to an intention comes attachment is now established. When attached to physical or mental phenomenon you suffer. When desire/lust/strong wanting stands you suffer. Now to talk about false realities. Things like the ego self. Because you attach to situations that happen because you are aware of it, ideas of the mind arise. you cling to the body thus you see yourself different from others , you believe to be the body - mind , but it all comes back to being aware. you create duality because the mine becomes conditioned when desire stands. You desire something, your mind is conditioned to the environment and others ego selves aswell. The ego itself is thoughts , it is as much as a fairy tale as mythology. It is merely made in the mind. Thus let’s say one wants material items for sense pleasures and ego boost, the moment you desire material items you attach to it. You suffer. You suffer to get it, you suffer if you don’t get it, you suffer when it’s lost, you suffer when someone crumbles your ego and bad talks you. Why? Because you desire for them to see highly of you, to not bad talk you. Why? You attach to ego. Why? You attach to phenomena you are aware of. Why? Because you ability to be aware. You are never not awareness, the mind is the only obstacle that says not so. Matter and other physical phenomenon moves and transfers due to movement, vibration caused by movement. Movement only comes with intent. Whether body or mind. And why is this able to be? Because that is aware. Whether person, animal, plant, etc. any conscious being is aware thus intent and conditioning happens. Without awareness how can one even be able to be conditioned physically or mentally and make intentions to make any matter or energy move and transfer continuously? Without this nothing arises. Not mind or physical movement. This is what the Buddhist labels as Sunyata (emptiness). This is why meditational practice is used in Indic religion. Someone puts off all desire no false realities can arise and even no movement. In samadhi (union with awareness, no intent, deep meditation) even the breath will stop, all bodily function will appear dead, that being has no sense of self, physical or mental, they are just witness consciousness. That which all evolves around. They are “God”. And you are also never not, only mind and clinging causes you to say so. Take Yogananda, Sri Ramakrishna, Ramana Maharshi, and other modern day sages that have shown this type of samadhi documented. This part is skeptical (samadhi) but nevertheless, all revolves around and comes into place , arises , from that which just is, awareness. They hindu calls this “atman”. It is in all but yet the cause of all existence to move, they call that “brahman”. There is no difference. Brahman sustains universally and it’s in you as the “atman”. The Buddhist label “Brahman” as “Dharmakaya”. In you as anatman. (No self). In science, you are aware, even when unconscious as I’ve stated before, you are aware. This awareness isn’t physical. It is aware of physical unconsciousness. Physical things fade. Come into being and disappear. But the witness which is in me, was in dinosaurs millions of years ago. In any animal now, any person. “I am” everywhere. When you sleep you wake and maybe say “I had a deep sleep” “I was sleeping” “I felt myself fall asleep” or if you pass out you may wake and say “I was unconscious” “I could feel it feel like nothing happened, the world felt nonexistent”. You see the “I” doesn’t change and even is aware when your physical consciousness fades. It is the witness. This is “God”. Because of knowing/witness/awareness/Atman, etc is there, everything else haves the ability to arise. Without this everything fades. Like the Christian Bible says “If God were to take back his spirit and withdraw his breath, all life would cease, and humanity would turn again to dust.” If awareness was not, nothing could arise physically or mentally. It would just be as Sunyata. Nothing, like before the Big Bang. Space - time like. Not only do all religions lead to the greatest science but physics and modern science leads to the greatest science. The science of un-physicality. The science of the pure being witness awareness as the base foundation of all. Max Planck had seen this. Albert Einstein. And many more. Quantum mechanics is the study leading to just this. Praise be to these great minds and intellect.
Spoiler: yes. Einstein was wrong
Probability????????? How about provable facts. Are they dreamers or liars.
"Einstein's QUNTUMN Theory" ?
Am i missing some reference (have not yet watched this video), or is this a peculiar typo?
An astute eye! We have spoken to the person in charge of typing titles, and he blamed "Friday Brain". Thank you :)
@@TheGreatCourses haha no problem, have a nice weekend! :)
God doesn’t play games.
Sir plz reply me i am waiting for reply
Only God can judge. Comes to the same more or less
It is God's zoo. Enjoy the show.
It is pronounce "Dee-broy" not "Dee-Broolee" or "Dee-brogue-lee." ☹️☹️☹️☹️☹️
The Creator is a black woman, she is logical
And she's called Lucy..
@@suatustel746 nope, Her name is Ma'at.
@@eastafrika728 thank you for enlightment, but you know James Brown tune 'this is a man's man's world yes second line but there'd be nothing without a girl or woman but the first verse could' ve been this is a girls or women world but there'd be nothing without a boy or man see what l mean...man rule the world trust me I'm not chavunastic sod.. .
@@suatustel746 it was never a man's world, the earth is female, if a man feels inadequate and is like a child, then he thinks it's a man's world.
@@eastafrika728 are we here to debate here with the battle of sexes, obviously you're a woman presumed heterosexual, in respect of this agenda you didn't choose your gender, you know there's masculine side as well as feminine, they all claim they're the superior race the irony is any gender whether male or female were they reincarnated don't want to be opposite number, it's a mystery to me unwilling view the world off the flip side... I partly agree with you somehow feminine wiles comes up trump most of the time but its good to chat with you..
God plays dice, it's just that, those dice are rigged.
Leonard Cohen knew that 'everybody knows dice is loaded
Yeah, rigged by humans that know better than god and win a game god does not play.
@@chapster6273 i mean, rigged for life....death is god throwing the dice again, living is playing, because in the end nobody beats the dice. it's trial and error until they stop hating so much, and no one has to keep dying. so, death is a 14+ billion yrs temporary mesure so far. until life get it right.
Keep in mind that all scientific theories are provisional and falsifiable, and science makes no truth claims or claims about “reality”. Making that connection is scientism, not science.
Excellent point.
This video is nonsense. This is why you hire a Historian OF Physics (or a historian of science), and not an actual physicist, to talk about the history of physics. Dan Hopper is an excellent physicist but poor historian of physics. There are many errors with this lecture.
Einstein contributed more to quantum theory than any other physicist in history.
Einstein didn't just write the photoelectric paper, he quantized the radiation field.
He then followed that up with his seminal paper on the Specific Heat of Solids.
He then followed that up with another seminal paper on Phonons.
He then followed that up with a revolutionary paper on Wave-Particle Duality. De Broglie almost literally copied Einsteins equation, applied it to electrons, and won his Nobel Prize on matter waves (which he would never have been able to do without Einsteins paper). Einstein, using ingenuous statistical arguments, did this 13 years BEFORE De Broglie did.
Bohrs work on electron orbits (discontinuous transitions) was also a direct byproduct of Einstein's work from 1905 to 1910.
Einsteins work on Spontaneous and Stimulated Emission, as codified in the Nobel-Prize worthy Einstein A and B Coefficients, created the foundation for the LASER.
Einsteins work on Bose-Einstein Statistics and Bose-Einstein Condensates, in which Einstein, and Einstein ALONE, predicted the Boson (which, due to historical reasons was incorrectly named) which created Condesed Matter physics - an entirely new state of matter. Without this work of Einstein's, superconductivity would be impossible. Without Einstein's work in this area, Schrodinger likely never derives the proper equation for the wave function as he always acknowledged.
It was Einstein who first conceived of what would essentially later become the Born Rule, according to Max Born himself, by interpreting the "square of the optical wave amplitudes as probability density for the occurence of photons." Max Born took Einsteins work - which Einstein had applied to a gas of photons - and simply applied it to a gas of electrons. And then won a Nobel Prize for it (Born, much like Schrodinger, was effusive in his praise for Einstein).
Einstein was the first to discover Entanglement, something that Bohr, Dirac, Heisenberg and Schrodinger etc all missed. Einsteins seminal EPR Paradox paper laid the foundation for quantum information theory as Clauser, Aspect, and others have widely acknowledged.
There is no quantum mechanics without Einstein as T. S. Kuhn, Stachel, Stone, Brown, and many other physicists and historians of physics have acknowledged.
For Dan Hopper to imply that Einstein's dislike of Quantum Mechanics meant that he didn't contribute to it other than being a critic of it is not just patently false but the shows a distinct lack of intellectual honesty. Did Einstein dislike certain elements of quantum theory, yes. Did he criticize it frequently, yes. But he also contributed most of the original concepts that would make it's way into the theory (including the aforementioned wave-particle duality, B-E Condensates, Intrinsic randomness, and Entanglement, to name only some). Einsteins big issue with quantum mechanics was not that it was probabilistic - after all his 1916-1919 papers on Spontaneous Emission introduced intrinsic randomness into quantum theory - but that Bohr insisted on the idea that the "observer" directly influenced measurements and experiments. That felt like, cheap superstitious reasoning to Einstein as Wolfgang Pauli pointed out in a letter to Max Born
Poor video. I recommend to anybody interested in learning about Einstein's IMMENSE contributions to Quantum mechanics to read two books starting with:
1. Einstein and the Quantum: The Quest of the Valiant Swabian by Douglas Stone
And
2. My God, He plays Dice!: How Albert Einstein Invented Most of Quantum Physics by Bob Doyle
To quote a peer of Dan Hopper, Cal Tech physicist Sean Carroll: "If anything, Einstein is underrated; he understood quantum mechanics better than anybody ever has."
I thought skeetball was God's game of choice.
Is the difference between Classical physics and Quantum physics the edge between the present and future?
Accorinding to muslim... Einstein is muslim...
None of this is true.
Also he watched He-Man just like you 90s lot. That's me also. Alan Shearer was the best
I'm just not smart enough to watch this. It's not you it's me.
Great talk. But I do not understand the incessant urge to promote atheism in talks delivered by physicists. Stick to the physics please!
This video is nonsense. This is why you hire a Historian OF Physics (or a historian of science), and not an actual physicist, to talk about the history of physics. Dan Hopper is an excellent physicist but poor historian of physics. There are many errors with this lecture.
Einstein contributed more to quantum theory than any other physicist in history.
Einstein didn't just write the photoelectric paper, he quantized the radiation field.
He then followed that up with his seminal paper on the Specific Heat of Solids.
He then followed that up with another seminal paper on Phonons.
He then followed that up with a revolutionary paper on Wave-Particle Duality. De Broglie almost literally copied Einsteins equation, applied it to electrons, and won his Nobel Prize on matter waves (which he would never have been able to do without Einsteins paper). Einstein, using ingenuous statistical arguments, did this 13 years BEFORE De Broglie did.
Bohrs work on electron orbits (discontinuous transitions) was also a direct byproduct of Einstein's work from 1905 to 1910.
Einsteins work on Spontaneous and Stimulated Emission, as codified in the Nobel-Prize worthy Einstein A and B Coefficients, created the foundation for the LASER.
Einsteins work on Bose-Einstein Statistics and Bose-Einstein Condensates, in which Einstein, and Einstein ALONE, predicted the Boson (which, due to historical reasons was incorrectly named) which created Condesed Matter physics - an entirely new state of matter. Without this work of Einstein's, superconductivity would be impossible. Without Einstein's work in this area, Schrodinger likely never derives the proper equation for the wave function as he always acknowledged.
It was Einstein who first conceived of what would essentially later become the Born Rule, according to Max Born himself, by interpreting the "square of the optical wave amplitudes as probability density for the occurence of photons." Max Born took Einsteins work - which Einstein had applied to a gas of photons - and simply applied it to a gas of electrons. And then won a Nobel Prize for it (Born, much like Schrodinger, was effusive in his praise for Einstein).
Einstein was the first to discover Entanglement, something that Bohr, Dirac, Heisenberg and Schrodinger etc all missed. Einsteins seminal EPR Paradox paper laid the foundation for quantum information theory as Clauser, Aspect, and others have widely acknowledged.
There is no quantum mechanics without Einstein as T. S. Kuhn, Stachel, Stone, Brown, and many other physicists and historians of physics have acknowledged.
For Dan Hopper to imply that Einstein's dislike of Quantum Mechanics meant that he didn't contribute to it other than being a critic of it is not just patently false but the shows a distinct lack of intellectual honesty. Did Einstein dislike certain elements of quantum theory, yes. Did he criticize it frequently, yes. But he also contributed most of the original concepts that would make it's way into the theory (including the aforementioned wave-particle duality, B-E Condensates, Intrinsic randomness, and Entanglement, to name only some). Einsteins big issue with quantum mechanics was not that it was probabilistic - after all his 1916-1919 papers on Spontaneous Emission introduced intrinsic randomness into quantum theory - but that Bohr insisted on the idea that the "observer" directly influenced measurements and experiments. That felt like, cheap superstitious reasoning to Einstein as Wolfgang Pauli pointed out in a letter to Max Born
Poor video. I recommend to anybody interested in learning about Einstein's IMMENSE contributions to Quantum mechanics to read two books starting with:
1. Einstein and the Quantum: The Quest of the Valiant Swabian by Douglas Stone
And
2. My God, He plays Dice!: How Albert Einstein Invented Most of Quantum Physics by Bob Doyle
To quote a peer of Dan Hopper, Cal Tech physicist Sean Carroll: "If anything, Einstein is underrated; he understood quantum mechanics better than anybody ever has."
So sad. Most physicists are not religious nuts to promote theism. And most theists are not good physicists.
No god.
CLICKBATE SCIENCE
Quran "We will show them Our signs in the horizons and within themselves until it becomes clear to them that it is the truth. But is it not sufficient concerning your Lord that He is, over all things, a Witness?"
Quran "Travel through the land and observe how He began creation. Then Allah will produce the final creation. Indeed Allah, over all things, is competent."
Quran "Recite in the name of your Lord who created - Created man from a clinging substance. Recite, and your Lord is the most Generous - Who taught by the pen - Taught man that which he knew not.
Quran " And it is He who created the heavens and the earth in six days - and His Throne had been upon water - that He might test you as to which of you is best in deed. But if you say, "Indeed, you are resurrected after death," those who disbelieve will surely say, "This is not but obvious magic.""
Quran " And it is He who has created from water a human being "
Quran "we made from water every living thing? Then will they not believe?"
Quran "And the heaven We constructed with strength, and indeed, We are [its] expander."
No he plays chess with our lives againts the devil everyday...we the poor are the pawns and the rich and wealthy are his king,queen,rook,bishop and nights....thats why we the poor die first because we are his pawns. We get sacrificed for the rich and wealthy.
in Islam "as my understanding" to Quran, there is the followings
1- there is 7 universe and each universe have one earth [ total 7 universe and 7 earths]
“ It is Allah who has created seven heavens and of the earth, the like of them. [His] command descends among them so you may know that Allah is over all things competent and that Allah has encompassed all things in knowledge.” CH65-V12
2- the shape of the universe is flat [like layer] .and we are in the lowest universe.
“ And We have created above you seven layered heavens, and never have We been of [Our] creation unaware.” CH23-V17
“[And] who created seven heavens in layers. You do not see in the creation of the Most Merciful any inconsistency. So, return [your] vision [to the sky]; do you see any breaks?” CH67-V3
“We have adorned the lower heaven with the adornment of the stars”. CH37-6
“The Day when We will fold the heaven like the folding of a [written] sheet for the records. As We began the first creation, so we shall bring it back again. [That is] a promise binding upon Us. Indeed, we will do it.” cH21-104
Have those who disbelieved not considered that the heavens and the earth were a joined entity, and We separated them and made from water every living thing? Then will they not believe?
“The Day when We will fold the heaven like the folding of a [written] sheet for the records. As We began the first creation, so we shall bring it back again. [That is] a promise binding upon Us. Indeed, we will do it.” cH21-104
Quran : "Originator of the heavens and the earth. When He decrees a matter, He only says to it, "Be," and it is."
Quran :" And Our command is but one, like a glance of the eye."
Quran : "And to Allah belongs the unseen [aspects] of the heavens and the earth. And the command for the Hour (of Judgment) is not but as a glance of the eye or even nearer. Indeed, Allah is over all things competent."
Quran : "Originator of the heavens and the earth. When He decrees a matter, He only says to it, "Be," and it is.
Quran : And the heaven We constructed with strength, and indeed, We are [its] expander.
God of the Bible doesn't play dice 🤦♂️ God knows every outcome. He's beyond our comprehension